Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40230951›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2024

USG and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative and postoperative management of hepatic lesions: A prospective study.

Hariprasad Ramanathan, Sachin Dawale, Kaushik Rajavel, Pritika Gnanasekaran, Priyadarshini Ramesh, Holebasu B

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hariprasad RamanathanDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, JIPMER, Pondicherry, India.
Sachin DawaleDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, MGIMS, Sevagram, Maharashtra, India.
Kaushik RajavelDepartment of Orthopaedics, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Pritika GnanasekaranDepartment of Medicine, Global Medical Centre, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India.
Priyadarshini RameshDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Holebasu BDepartment of Radiology, KLE JGMM Medical College, Hubballi, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hepatic lesions are common and require accurate diagnosis for effective management and treatment outcomes. This study compared the diagnostic efficacy and sensitivity of USG and MRI in preoperative and postoperative evaluations of hepatic lesions in 100 patients over 12 months. MRI demonstrated superior sensitivity, particularly for lesions smaller than 2 cm (p < 0.0001) and influenced surgical decision-making in 40% of cases by providing more accurate lesion characterization. Postoperative assessments with MRI were more effective in detecting residual or recurrent disease than USG (p = 0.002). These findings highlight MRI's critical role in surgical planning and comprehensive management of hepatic lesions.

Indexed as

Hepatic lesionsimaging modalitiesliver tumoursMRIpostoperative follow-uppreoperative imagingultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID40230951
PMCPMC11993422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.