ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2025
Automatic Real-Time Detection and Diagnosis of Liver Tumor with Ultrasound.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aim: Ultrasonography is the most commonly used screening tool for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the diagnostic performance of ultrasound is highly operator dependent. We aimed to develop deep learning (DL) models to automatically diagnose and detect hepatic lesions in a larger dataset, with HCC as the dominant malignancy. Methods: We enrolled patients diagnosed with hepatic tumors using abdominal ultrasound between January 2002 and December 2020 in a retrospective cohort with a diagnosis of malignant and benign lesions. A total of 1576 patients with 4599 images and 6001 lesions were analyzed. Deep learning models included ResNet50, Xception, Inception Resnet V2, EfficientNet-B5, EfficientNetV2-S, EfficientNetV2-L, Swin-T, and Swin-B for diagnosis and YOLOR for lesion detection. We analyzed the area under the curve (AUC) to determine the diagnostic performance and choose the best model. The mean Average Precision (mAP) score was then evaluated for real-time lesion detection using the area under the precision-recall curve after the average of each category. Results: The dataset was separated into 1061 in training, 373 in validation, and 142 testing sets. The AUC for ResNet50, Xception, Inception Resnet V2, EfficientNet-B5, EfficientNetV2-S, EfficientNetV2-L, Swin-T, and Swin-B are 0.88, 0.89, 0.88, 0.90, 0.85, 0.89, 0.89, and 0.90, respectively. The mAP scores for detecting and differentiating malignant and benign lesions for YOLOR-W6 and YOLOR-D6 in the validation and testing sets were 0.5134/0.5342 and 0.5410/0.5631. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that DL models can differentiate between benign and malignant lesions with high accuracy on ultrasound images. Simultaneous DL-based lesion detection and classification are also possible using real-time ultrasonography.
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.