| Title |
Diagnostic accuracy of prospective application of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) in gadoxetate-enhanced MRI
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00330-017-5188-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yeun-Yoon Kim, Chansik An, Sungwon Kim, Myeong-Jin Kim |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS (v2014) on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI prospectively applied in actual practice. We retrospectively reviewed the prospectively written radiology reports of 143 treatment-naïve at-risk patients who underwent gadoxetate-enhanced liver MRI from January to December 2014, and identified 202 hepatic observations categorized using the LI-RADS. The diagnostic performances of LI-RADS categories for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hepatic malignancy were calculated. Twenty (69.0 %) of 29 LR-4, 73 (97.3 %) of 75 LR-5, and all of five (100 %) LR-5V observations were HCCs. The remaining two (2.7 %) LR-5 observations were combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas, while 10 (76.9 %) of 13 LR-M observations were HCCs. The sensitivity and specificity of LR-5/5V for HCC were 60.5 % and 97.3 %, respectively. Including LR-M in the diagnostic criteria for HCC increased sensitivity (68.2 %, p = 0.002) but decreased specificity without statistical significance (93.2 %, p = 0.154). LR-5/5V/M yielded sensitivity of 68.9 % and specificity of 100.0 % for hepatic malignancy. LI-RADS v2014 was successfully applied on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI in clinical practice. LR-5/5V was the most specific diagnostic measure for HCC, but most LR-M observations were HCCs and a considerable portion of non-HCC malignancies were categorized as LR-4 or LR-5. • LR-5/5V provided a highly specific diagnosis for HCC. • Half of non-HCC malignancies were categorized as LR-4 or LR-5. • The majority of LR-M observations were finally diagnosed as HCCs. • More sensitive diagnosis of HCC was feasible with LR-5/5V/M on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI. • Observations in either LR-5/5V or LR-M categories were definitely malignant. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 31% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 62% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,059,032
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#835
of 4,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,457
of 439,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#18
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,170 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.