ArticlePolish journal of radiology2025
Evaluating the potential of abbreviated MRI protocols for liver metastasis detection: a study in colorectal cancer patients.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Can abbreviated MRI replace standard protocols in IPMN surveillance? A retrospective comparative study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (AMRI) protocols consisting of dynamic enhanced + T2-weighted imaging (T2W) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) + T2W for the detection and characterization of liver metastases in a patient group with known colorectal cancer. Material and methods: A total of 197 hepatic lesions were retrospectively analyzed across 3 different MRI sets: AMRI-1 (dynamic enhanced + T2W), AMRI-2 (DWI + T2W), and a standard MRI protocol. The patient cohort included 100 individuals (63 males, 37 females) with a mean age of 62.6 years (SD: 11.1 years). Lesions were characterized as benign, malignant, or indeterminate based on histopathology, positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT), and follow-up imaging. Results: The standard MRI protocol identified 197 liver lesions (175 metastatic, 18 benign, and 4 indeterminate); 142 lesions (72.1%) were larger than 10 mm, with the majority being metastatic (140/142). Radiologist 1 identified 195 lesions using the AMRI-1 protocol (175 metastatic, 15 benign, and 5 indeterminate). The sensitivity per lesion was 89.7% (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Radiologist 2 identified 183 lesions using the AMRI-2 protocol (169 metastatic, 6 benign, and 8 indeterminate). The sensitivity per lesion was 92.3% (95% CI: 0.88-0.95). No statistically significant difference was found in sensitivity between the AMRI-1 and AMRI-2 and standard MRI protocols ( Conclusions: The standard MRI protocol demonstrated the highest sensitivity and specificity for detecting and characterizing liver metastases. However, differences between the protocols were not statistically significant. Abbreviated MRI protocols, particularly the AMRI-2 protocol incorporating diffusion-weighted imaging, could serve as an effective alternative for routine clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.