ArticlePloS one2026
Diagnostic performance of abbreviated non-contrast liver MRI for detecting synchronous colorectal liver metastases.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading malignancy, and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are common. Accurate detection is critical for staging and treatment planning. Although contrast-enhanced MRI is the reference standard, its use is limited by cost, longer examination time, and contraindications such as renal impairment or prior severe allergic reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of an abbreviated non-contrast liver MRI protocol for detecting CRLM and to compare performance between experienced and in-training readers. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective study, 87 patients with CRC who underwent liver MRI between January 2014 and March 2024 were included. The abbreviated non-contrast protocol comprised T1-weighted imaging (T1WI), T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Two independent readers evaluated the images using a 4-point confidence scale, which was dichotomized for analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy were calculated, and interobserver agreement was assessed using weighted kappa. Contrast-enhanced MRI served as the reference standard.
resultsThe abbreviated non-contrast MRI demonstrated high diagnostic performance. Sensitivity and specificity were 94.1% and 88.7% for the abdominal radiologist, and 91.2% and 96.2% for the oncologic imaging fellow. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.93 and 0.94, respectively, with no significant difference between readers (p = 0.494). Interobserver agreement was substantial (weighted κ = 0.74).
conclusionNon-contrast MRI demonstrated reliable diagnostic performance with substantial interobserver agreement for CRLM detection, suggesting its potential clinical applicability. While contrast-enhanced MRI remains the standard, non-contrast MRI may be a feasible alternative in select cases. Further large-scale validation is necessary before broader clinical adoption.
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.