ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
CT-derived hepatic extracellular volume fraction for the assessment of graft rejection after liver transplantation: a retrospective observational study.
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. 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.
- MRI-Derived Evaluation of Liver Function and Its Extension to K-Edge Photon-Counting CT: Focus on Gadolinium-Based Functional Biliary Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the diagnostic performance of hepatic extracellular volume (ECV) fraction derived from delayed single-energy CT for identifying graft rejection in liver transplant recipients and its added value over clinical parameters. This retrospective observational study included consecutive adult liver transplant recipients with available unenhanced and delayed (3-5-min) contrast-enhanced CT examinations. Hepatic ECV was calculated using regions of interest in the liver parenchyma and abdominal aorta, corrected for hematocrit. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of graft rejection. ECV values were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Logistic regression models were constructed to assess predictors of rejection. To avoid multicollinearity, separate MELD-based and laboratory-based clinical models were evaluated, and ECV was added to each model to assess its incremental value. Model performance was evaluated by comparing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Eighty-four liver transplant recipients were included (21 with rejection and 63 without). Median ECV was 32.4% in the rejection group and 28.7% in the non-rejection group (P = 0.100). ECV alone demonstrated limited diagnostic performance (AUC 0.62). A MELD-based clinical model achieved an AUC of 0.73, which minimally increased to 0.74 after adding ECV (ΔAUC = 0.009; bootstrap P = 0.180). A laboratory-based model achieved an AUC of 0.72 and remained unchanged after adding ECV (ΔAUC = 0.0005; bootstrap P = 1.000). Hepatic ECV derived from delayed CT was not significantly associated with graft rejection and did not improve the diagnostic performance of either MELD-based or laboratory-based clinical models. Despite prior evidence linking increased ECV to hepatic injury and fibrosis, our findings suggest that ECV may not be sensitive to the complex and multifactorial processes underlying graft rejection in liver transplant recipients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42360351What 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.