A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Modified CEUS LI-RADS With Perfluorobutane in Patients at High-Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS) 2017 version is based on pure-blood pool contrast agent, potentially unsuitable for perfluorobutane contrast agent with the Kupffer phase. This article aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of unmodified CEUS LI-RADS and modified CEUS LI-RADS using perfluorobutane for hepatocellular carcinoma by integrating published and original data from three medical centers. Comparison between unmodified and modified CEUS LI-RADS with perfluorobutane involved ranking the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and superiority index (SI) using an ANOVA arm-based model. This meta-analysis included nine studies and our original data, encompassing 1505 patients with 1622 lesions. The summarized sensitivity of the modified CEUS LI-RADS was higher than that of the unmodified version (0.77 [0.72-0.81] vs. 0.70 [0.63-0.76]), while specificity was similar for both (0.86 [0.78-0.91] vs. 0.86 [0.77-0.92]). The general diagnostic performance of the modified CEUS LI-RADS was superior to the unmodified version, indicated by a higher DOR (16.98 [11.65-23.43] vs. 12.51 [8.11-18.44], p = 0.02) and SI (1.59 [1.00-3.00] vs. 0.80 [0.33-1.00], p = 0.02). Modified CEUS LI-RADS may be of better diagnostic performance, offering higher sensitivity without compromising specificity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2025.05.024DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ceus li-rads
32
modified ceus
24
li-rads perfluorobutane
12
diagnostic performance
12
li-rads
8
hepatocellular carcinoma
8
contrast agent
8
original data
8
unmodified version
8
ceus
7

Similar Publications