ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Evaluating the performance of multiphasic CT in assessing biliary tumor extent and resectability in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: insights from a Western population.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of multiphasic CT using an adapted version of the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology standardized reporting template, to assess tumor extent of perihilar CCA in a Western population, as well as to investigate inter-reader agreement of tumor extent assessment and resectability (predicting R0 resection) using the standardized reporting template.
methodsThis retrospective study included 97 patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. Four abdominal radiologists independently reviewed preoperative multiphasic CT using a modified KSAR structured template to assess biliary tumor extent, vascular involvement, and resectability. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, with pathology as the reference standard. Inter-reader agreement was assessed using kappa statistics, and concordant reads (agreement by ≥ 2 readers) were analyzed. Subgroup analyses were performed based on CT quality and presence of biliary intervention.
resultsCT demonstrated generally low to moderate sensitivity (0-80%), whereas specificity consistently high (65-97%) for assessing biliary tumor extent, with accuracy ranging from 62 to 91% across anatomical sites. Sensitivity slightly increased with concordant reads and in patients with optimal CT quality and no prior biliary intervention. Prediction of R0 resection was limited, with AUC values near 0.5 for all readers. Inter-reader agreement was fair for biliary extent (κ = 0.23-0.35) and lower for vascular involvement and resectability.
conclusionMultiphasic CT has limited sensitivity but high specificity in evaluating biliary tumor extent. Structured reporting, high-quality imaging before biliary intervention, and multi-reader or multidisciplinary approaches may improve diagnostic accuracy and preoperative planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41656382What 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.