Notes![what is notes.io? What is notes.io?](/theme/images/whatisnotesio.png)
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
To establish inter-reader reliability of CT Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and explore factors that affect it.
MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from January 2014 to March 2020 to identify original articles reporting the inter-reader reliability of CT LI-RADS. The imaging analysis methodology of each study was identified, and pooled intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) or kappa values (κ) were calculated for lesion size, major features (arterial-phase hyperenhancement [APHE], nonperipheral washout [WO], andenhancing capsule [EC]), and LI-RADS categorization (LR) using random-effects models. find more Subgroup analyses of pooled κ were performed for the number of readers, average reader experience, differences in reader experience, and LI-RADS version.
In the 12 included studies, the pooled ICC or κ of lesion size, APHE, WO, EC, and LR were 0.99 (0.96-1.00), 0.69 (0.58-0.81), 0.67 (0.53-0.82), 0.65 (0.54-0.76), and 0.70 (0.59-0.82), respectively. The experience and number of readersrage reader experience and the difference in reader experience.
• The CT Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) provides substantial inter-reader reliability for three major features and category assignment. • The imaging analysis methodology varied across studies. • The inter-reader reliability of CT LI-RADS differed significantly according to the average reader experience and the difference in reader experience.
To evaluate the dual-energy (DE) performance and spectral separation with respect to iodine imaging in a photon-counting CT (PCCT) and compare it to dual-source CT (DSCT) DE imaging.
A semi-anthropomorphic phantom extendable with fat rings equipped with iodine vials is measured in an experimental PCCT. The system comprises a PC detector with two energy bins (20 keV, T) and (T, eU) with threshold T and tube voltage U. Measurements using the PCCT are performed at all available tube voltages (80 to 140 kV) and threshold settings (50-90 keV). Further measurements are performed using a conventional energy-integrating DSCT. Spectral separation is quantified as the relative contrast media ratio R between the energy bins and low/high images. Image noise and dose-normalized contrast-to-noise ratio (CNRD) are evaluated in resulting iodine images. All results are validated in a post-mortem angiography study.
R of the PC detector varies between 1.2 and 2.6 and increases with higher thresholds and higher tube voltaguality compared to conventional dual-source dual-energy CT. • Thresholds should be chosen as a function of the tube voltage to maximize iodine contrast-to-noise ratio in derived image sets. • Image quality of retrospectively computed image sets can be maximized using optimized threshold settings.
• The intriguing "Check Mark Sign" suggests 3rd cranial nerve involvement in GCA.
• The intriguing "Check Mark Sign" suggests 3rd cranial nerve involvement in GCA.
To evaluate early (≤ 2 years) local tumor progression (LTP), intrahepatic distant metastasis (IDR), and extrahepatic metastasis (EM) of primary hepatic malignant tumors with arterial rim enhancement (RE) after RFA in comparison with non-RE tumors.
Three hundred forty-nine patients who underwent RFA for primary hepatic malignant tumors between January 2009 and December 2016 were included. The patients' tumors were classified into non-RE, RE only (RO), and RE plus other targetoid appearances (REoT). Cumulative LTP, IDR, and EM rates at 1 and 2 years after RFA were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Prognostic factors for the outcomes were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model.
There were 303 non-RE, 19 RO, and 27 REoT tumors. The REoT tumors had a significantly higher rate of IDR and EM than non-RE (p = 0.04 for IDR; and p < 0.01 for EM, respectively) at 1 year after RFA. At 2 years, LTP and EM rates were significantly higher for REoT than for non-RE (p = 0.001 for LTP; and p = 0.444 for EM, respectively). The RO tumors did not have different outcomes than non-RE at 1 and 2 years after RFA. Multivariable analysis verified that REoT was a significant factor for IDR (p = 0.04) and EM (p = 0.01) at 1 year and LTP (p = 0.02) at 2 years.
Tumors with REoT had poor LTP, IDR, and EM within 2 years after RFA than non-RE tumors. However, tumors with RO showed similar results as non-RE tumors.
• Tumors with Rim enhancement plus other targetoid appearances (REoT) had a significantly higher rate of recurrence than non-rim enhancing (RE) tumors at 1 and 2 years after RFA. • Tumors with rim enhancement only did not have different outcomes than non-RE at 1 and 2 years after RFA.
• Tumors with Rim enhancement plus other targetoid appearances (REoT) had a significantly higher rate of recurrence than non-rim enhancing (RE) tumors at 1 and 2 years after RFA. • Tumors with rim enhancement only did not have different outcomes than non-RE at 1 and 2 years after RFA.
Confidence in long-term treatment results of thermal ablation for papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC) is required in comparison with active surveillance. The objective of this meta-analysis is to report 5-year follow-up results of thermal ablation for PTMC.
Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through May 30, 2020, for studies reporting outcomes in patients with PTMC treated with thermal ablation and followed up for at least 5 years. Data were extracted and methodological quality was assessed independently by two radiologists according to the PRISMA guidelines.
Three studies, involving 207 patients with 219 PTMCs, met the inclusion criteria through database searches. None of these patients experienced local tumor recurrence, lymph node metastasis, or distant metastasis or underwent delayed surgery during a mean pooled 67.8-month follow-up. Five new tumors appeared in the remaining thyroid gland of four patients, with four of these tumors successfully treated by repeat thermal ablation. The pooled mean major complication rate was 1.2%, with no patient experiencing life-threatening or delayed complications.
Thermal ablation is an excellent local tumor control method in patients with low-risk PTMC, with low major complication rates at 5 years.
• No local tumor recurrence, lymph node metastasis, or distant metastasis was noted by thermal ablation during follow-up of 5 years and none underwent delayed surgery. • The pooled mean major complication rate was 1.2%.
• No local tumor recurrence, lymph node metastasis, or distant metastasis was noted by thermal ablation during follow-up of 5 years and none underwent delayed surgery. • The pooled mean major complication rate was 1.2%.
My Website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/pyr-41.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team