World journal of gastroenterology · 2012
High-risk esophageal varices in patients treated with locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: assessment with liver computed tomography.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Hyojin, Choi Dongil, Lee Joon Hyeok, Lee Soon Jin, Jo Hangi, Gwak Geum-Youn, Koh Kwang Cheol, Choi Moon Seok, Kim Seonwoo
Аннотация
AIM: To assess the diagnostic performance of follow-up liver computed tomography (CT) for the detection of high-risk esophageal varices in patients treated with locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 100 patients with cirrhosis who underwent transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation or both procedures for HCCs. All patients underwent upper endoscopy and subsequently liver CT. Three radiologists independently evaluated the presence of high-risk esophageal varices with transverse images alone and with three orthogonal multiplanar reformation (MPR) images, respectively. With endoscopic grading as the reference standard, diagnostic performance was assessed by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The diagnostic performances (areas under the ROC curve) of three observers with transverse images alone were 0.947 ± 0.031, 0.969 ± 0.024, and 0.916 ± 0.038, respectively. The mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predicative value (PPV), and negative predicative value (NPV) with transverse images alone were 90.1%, 86.39%, 70.9%, and 95.9%, respectively. The diagnostic performances, mean sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV with three orthogonal MPR images (0.965 ± 0.025, 0.959 ± 0.027, 0.938 ± 0.033, 91.4%, 89.5%, 76.3%, and 96.6%, respectively) were not superior to corresponding values with transverse images alone (P > 0.05), except for the mean specificity (P = 0.039).
CONCLUSION: Our results showed excellent diagnostic performance, sensitivity and NPV to detect high-risk esophageal varices on follow-up liver CT after locoregional therapy for HCC.
METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 100 patients with cirrhosis who underwent transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation or both procedures for HCCs. All patients underwent upper endoscopy and subsequently liver CT. Three radiologists independently evaluated the presence of high-risk esophageal varices with transverse images alone and with three orthogonal multiplanar reformation (MPR) images, respectively. With endoscopic grading as the reference standard, diagnostic performance was assessed by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The diagnostic performances (areas under the ROC curve) of three observers with transverse images alone were 0.947 ± 0.031, 0.969 ± 0.024, and 0.916 ± 0.038, respectively. The mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predicative value (PPV), and negative predicative value (NPV) with transverse images alone were 90.1%, 86.39%, 70.9%, and 95.9%, respectively. The diagnostic performances, mean sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV with three orthogonal MPR images (0.965 ± 0.025, 0.959 ± 0.027, 0.938 ± 0.033, 91.4%, 89.5%, 76.3%, and 96.6%, respectively) were not superior to corresponding values with transverse images alone (P > 0.05), except for the mean specificity (P = 0.039).
CONCLUSION: Our results showed excellent diagnostic performance, sensitivity and NPV to detect high-risk esophageal varices on follow-up liver CT after locoregional therapy for HCC.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, HepatocellularCatheter AblationChemoembolization, TherapeuticEsophageal and Gastric VaricesEsophagoscopyFemaleHumansLiver CirrhosisLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultidetector Computed TomographyObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesROC CurveReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness IndexTime FactorsTreatment Outcome