Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42804111›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2026

Hepatobiliary phase imaging in HCC: revisiting diagnostic algorithms and clinical utility of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI across international guidelines.

Shuwei Zhou, Jie Yang, Shuhang Zhang, Yu Song, Shuang Li, Xiaofeng Yu, Siyu Wang, Shenghong Ju, Tian You, Yuan-Cheng Wang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2026. 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

10 authors.

Shuwei Zhou *Department of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Jie Yang *Department of Emergency Surgery, Kunshan Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Kunshan, China.
Shuhang ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Yu SongDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Shuang LiDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Xiaofeng YuDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Siyu WangDepartment of Emergency Surgery, Kunshan Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Kunshan, China.
Shenghong JuDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Tian YouDepartment of Radiology, The First Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha, China. Yt10091009@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-9356-4393
Yuan-Cheng WangDepartment of Radiology, Zhongda Hospital, Nurturing Center of Jiangsu Province for State Laboratory of AI Imaging & Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing, China. yuancheng_wang@seu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6253-8311

Funding

Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82271978Kunshan Youth Science and Technology Talent Support Project 2025KSTJ04Research Project of Jiangsu Society of Traditional Chinese Medicine CYTF2024045Research Project of Jiangsu Society of Traditional Chinese Medicine ZXFZ2026084Research Project of the Jiangsu Provincial Health Commission Z2025005Youth Science Fund Project of Kunshan Hospital of Chinese Medicine 2024QNJJ02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. In at-risk populations, noninvasive imaging diagnosis relies primarily on the vascular hallmarks of arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout appearance. However, these features are often absent in early hepatocarcinogenesis, thereby limiting timely detection. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI has expanded the role of imaging in HCC, yet its clinical value is often oversimplified as a comparison of diagnostic performance with CT or extracellular contrast MRI. A critical issue is that the same imaging feature, particularly hepatobiliary phase (HBP) hypointensity, carries different diagnostic consequences across international frameworks. Because HBP signal loss reflects early hepatocellular dysfunction that may precede typical vascular hallmarks, gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI provides a biologically driven sensitivity advantage for detecting small and early-stage HCC. However, its apparent performance varies largely according to diagnostic intent: sensitivity-oriented Asian guidelines incorporate HBP hypointensity as a major feature to enable earlier detection, whereas Western guidelines prioritize specificity in high-stakes decision contexts, such as liver transplantation, and therefore restrict its diagnostic weight. This intent-dependent interpretation explains much of the inconsistency reported in the literature and underscores the limitations of pooled, guideline-agnostic performance estimates. Beyond diagnosis, HBP imaging also offers complementary information for assessing treatment response, although it remains underutilized in current criteria. Overall, the clinical value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI lies not in universal superiority but in context-aligned application, shifting the focus from modality comparison to optimization according to downstream clinical consequences. KEY POINTS: Question Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI is interpreted differently across international hepatocellular carcinoma diagnostic guidelines, resulting in uncertainty regarding optimal imaging criteria and clinical decision-making. Findings Hepatobiliary phase hypointensity reflects early hepatocellular dysfunction and improves sensitivity for small and early-stage HCC, but its impact varies according to diagnostic intent. Critical Relevance Statement An intent-aligned interpretation strategy may help reconcile guideline heterogeneity and optimize the use of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, particularly in the evaluation of small HCC.

Indexed as

Carcinoma (Hepatocellular)DiagnosisGadoxetic acidGuidelineMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID42804111
PMCPMC13620025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.