Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging
Purpose To prospectively compare multidetector-row CT (MDCT) and MR imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the ablative margin (AM) and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency (RF) ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and assess whether non-contrast MRI with limited sequences (T1- and T2-wei...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Abdominal imaging 2017-10, Vol.42 (10), p.2527-2537 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2537 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 2527 |
| container_title | Abdominal imaging |
| container_volume | 42 |
| creator | Kim, Sung Mo Shin, Sang Soo Lee, Byung Chan Kim, Jin Woong Heo, Suk Hee Lim, Hyo Soon Jeong, Yong Yeon |
| description | Purpose
To prospectively compare multidetector-row CT (MDCT) and MR imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the ablative margin (AM) and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency (RF) ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and assess whether non-contrast MRI with limited sequences (T1- and T2-weighted imaging only) was superior to a conventional MDCT protocol.
Methods
A total of 33 consecutive patients with 42 HCCs were included in this study. Both MDCT and MR images were independently reviewed by two radiologists regarding the ability to visually discriminate between the AM and index tumor, and the AM status within ablation zones. The AM status was classified as AM-plus (AM completely surrounding the tumor), AM-zero (AM was partly discontinuous, without protrusion of the tumor), and AM-minus (AM was partly discontinuous, with protrusion of the tumor). During the follow-up period, the cumulative local tumor progression rates were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. To determine the added value of contrast-enhanced MR images, both reviewers separately evaluated the two sets (unenhanced and enhanced) of MR images.
Results
Visual discrimination between the AM and index tumor was possible in four (9.5%) and 34 (81%) of the 42 ablation zones using MDCT and MRI, respectively (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1888678935</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1888678935</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p212t-bf79ac52c76d17f81b2b724faeaf44c31b2935ea0de96826cfb6ec1c41bf03b73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkcFu1DAQhiMEolXpA3BBlrhwCdhO4iTc0KpApSIkVCRu1tgZL65iO9hOy_a5eEC83QUhTh5rPv0z__xV9ZzR14zS_k2ilAtWU9bXjLWivn9UnfJGiJrSbnj8t26_nVTnKd1QSpnoGOPd0-qEDy0dOeWn1a9LB1vrtwRvYV4h2-BJMATUXOpbJA5iaRPwE7F-wp8kry5EYp3DyULGeUfAZIwkwmSDifhjRa93R4EiZgr9HRfIQeM8rzNEoiFq64ODt0QHt0C0qYAK8x2iJ26ds50wo84h1jHckc31w_xPX8rYh2WfVU8MzAnPj-9Z9fX9xfXmY331-cPl5t1VvXDGc61MP4LuuO7FxHozMMVVz1sDCKZtdVP-Y9Mh0AlHMXChjRKomW6ZMrRRfXNWvTroLjEUXylLZ9PeBngMa5JsGAbRD0WkoC__Q2_CGn3ZTrKxZSPnZUShXhypVZUDyiUWR3En_-RRAH4AUmn5LcZ_ZKjc5y4PucuSu9znLu-b32-7otg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1941922968</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Kim, Sung Mo ; Shin, Sang Soo ; Lee, Byung Chan ; Kim, Jin Woong ; Heo, Suk Hee ; Lim, Hyo Soon ; Jeong, Yong Yeon</creator><creatorcontrib>Kim, Sung Mo ; Shin, Sang Soo ; Lee, Byung Chan ; Kim, Jin Woong ; Heo, Suk Hee ; Lim, Hyo Soon ; Jeong, Yong Yeon</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To prospectively compare multidetector-row CT (MDCT) and MR imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the ablative margin (AM) and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency (RF) ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and assess whether non-contrast MRI with limited sequences (T1- and T2-weighted imaging only) was superior to a conventional MDCT protocol.
Methods
A total of 33 consecutive patients with 42 HCCs were included in this study. Both MDCT and MR images were independently reviewed by two radiologists regarding the ability to visually discriminate between the AM and index tumor, and the AM status within ablation zones. The AM status was classified as AM-plus (AM completely surrounding the tumor), AM-zero (AM was partly discontinuous, without protrusion of the tumor), and AM-minus (AM was partly discontinuous, with protrusion of the tumor). During the follow-up period, the cumulative local tumor progression rates were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. To determine the added value of contrast-enhanced MR images, both reviewers separately evaluated the two sets (unenhanced and enhanced) of MR images.
Results
Visual discrimination between the AM and index tumor was possible in four (9.5%) and 34 (81%) of the 42 ablation zones using MDCT and MRI, respectively (
p
< 0.001). Thirty-eight and four cases were classified as AM-plus and AM-zero on MDCT images, respectively, whereas the ablation zones were categorized as AM-plus (
n
= 32), AM-zero (
n
= 9), and AM-minus (
n
= 1) when examining the MR images. The cumulative incidence of local tumor progression was significantly lower in cases with AM-plus on MRI (
p
= 0.007). Contrast-enhanced MRI had no added value for the assessment of the AM and index tumor.
Conclusion
MRI was superior to MDCT for the differential assessment of the AM and index tumor immediately after RF ablation for HCC. Non-contrast MRI was also superior to the conventional MDCT protocol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2366-004X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2366-0058</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28409202</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Ablation ; Adult ; Aged ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - diagnostic imaging ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - surgery ; Catheter Ablation - methods ; Computed tomography ; Contrast Media ; Disease Progression ; Female ; Gastroenterology ; Hazards ; Hepatocellular carcinoma ; Hepatology ; Humans ; Image contrast ; Image enhancement ; Imaging ; Liver cancer ; Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Liver Neoplasms - pathology ; Liver Neoplasms - surgery ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Male ; Margins of Excision ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; Radio frequency ; Radio Waves ; Radiofrequency ablation ; Radiology ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods ; Treatment Outcome ; Visual discrimination</subject><ispartof>Abdominal imaging, 2017-10, Vol.42 (10), p.2527-2537</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017</rights><rights>Abdominal Radiology is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-p212t-bf79ac52c76d17f81b2b724faeaf44c31b2935ea0de96826cfb6ec1c41bf03b73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28409202$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kim, Sung Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shin, Sang Soo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Byung Chan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jin Woong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heo, Suk Hee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lim, Hyo Soon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeong, Yong Yeon</creatorcontrib><title>Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging</title><title>Abdominal imaging</title><addtitle>Abdom Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Abdom Radiol (NY)</addtitle><description>Purpose
To prospectively compare multidetector-row CT (MDCT) and MR imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the ablative margin (AM) and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency (RF) ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and assess whether non-contrast MRI with limited sequences (T1- and T2-weighted imaging only) was superior to a conventional MDCT protocol.
Methods
A total of 33 consecutive patients with 42 HCCs were included in this study. Both MDCT and MR images were independently reviewed by two radiologists regarding the ability to visually discriminate between the AM and index tumor, and the AM status within ablation zones. The AM status was classified as AM-plus (AM completely surrounding the tumor), AM-zero (AM was partly discontinuous, without protrusion of the tumor), and AM-minus (AM was partly discontinuous, with protrusion of the tumor). During the follow-up period, the cumulative local tumor progression rates were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. To determine the added value of contrast-enhanced MR images, both reviewers separately evaluated the two sets (unenhanced and enhanced) of MR images.
Results
Visual discrimination between the AM and index tumor was possible in four (9.5%) and 34 (81%) of the 42 ablation zones using MDCT and MRI, respectively (
p
< 0.001). Thirty-eight and four cases were classified as AM-plus and AM-zero on MDCT images, respectively, whereas the ablation zones were categorized as AM-plus (
n
= 32), AM-zero (
n
= 9), and AM-minus (
n
= 1) when examining the MR images. The cumulative incidence of local tumor progression was significantly lower in cases with AM-plus on MRI (
p
= 0.007). Contrast-enhanced MRI had no added value for the assessment of the AM and index tumor.
Conclusion
MRI was superior to MDCT for the differential assessment of the AM and index tumor immediately after RF ablation for HCC. Non-contrast MRI was also superior to the conventional MDCT protocol.</description><subject>Ablation</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - surgery</subject><subject>Catheter Ablation - methods</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Contrast Media</subject><subject>Disease Progression</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Hazards</subject><subject>Hepatocellular carcinoma</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image contrast</subject><subject>Image enhancement</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Liver cancer</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Margins of Excision</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Radio frequency</subject><subject>Radio Waves</subject><subject>Radiofrequency ablation</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Visual discrimination</subject><issn>2366-004X</issn><issn>2366-0058</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkcFu1DAQhiMEolXpA3BBlrhwCdhO4iTc0KpApSIkVCRu1tgZL65iO9hOy_a5eEC83QUhTh5rPv0z__xV9ZzR14zS_k2ilAtWU9bXjLWivn9UnfJGiJrSbnj8t26_nVTnKd1QSpnoGOPd0-qEDy0dOeWn1a9LB1vrtwRvYV4h2-BJMATUXOpbJA5iaRPwE7F-wp8kry5EYp3DyULGeUfAZIwkwmSDifhjRa93R4EiZgr9HRfIQeM8rzNEoiFq64ODt0QHt0C0qYAK8x2iJ26ds50wo84h1jHckc31w_xPX8rYh2WfVU8MzAnPj-9Z9fX9xfXmY331-cPl5t1VvXDGc61MP4LuuO7FxHozMMVVz1sDCKZtdVP-Y9Mh0AlHMXChjRKomW6ZMrRRfXNWvTroLjEUXylLZ9PeBngMa5JsGAbRD0WkoC__Q2_CGn3ZTrKxZSPnZUShXhypVZUDyiUWR3En_-RRAH4AUmn5LcZ_ZKjc5y4PucuSu9znLu-b32-7otg</recordid><startdate>20171001</startdate><enddate>20171001</enddate><creator>Kim, Sung Mo</creator><creator>Shin, Sang Soo</creator><creator>Lee, Byung Chan</creator><creator>Kim, Jin Woong</creator><creator>Heo, Suk Hee</creator><creator>Lim, Hyo Soon</creator><creator>Jeong, Yong Yeon</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20171001</creationdate><title>Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging</title><author>Kim, Sung Mo ; Shin, Sang Soo ; Lee, Byung Chan ; Kim, Jin Woong ; Heo, Suk Hee ; Lim, Hyo Soon ; Jeong, Yong Yeon</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p212t-bf79ac52c76d17f81b2b724faeaf44c31b2935ea0de96826cfb6ec1c41bf03b73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Ablation</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - surgery</topic><topic>Catheter Ablation - methods</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Contrast Media</topic><topic>Disease Progression</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Hazards</topic><topic>Hepatocellular carcinoma</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image contrast</topic><topic>Image enhancement</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Liver cancer</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Margins of Excision</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Radio frequency</topic><topic>Radio Waves</topic><topic>Radiofrequency ablation</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Visual discrimination</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kim, Sung Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shin, Sang Soo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Byung Chan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jin Woong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heo, Suk Hee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lim, Hyo Soon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeong, Yong Yeon</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Abdominal imaging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kim, Sung Mo</au><au>Shin, Sang Soo</au><au>Lee, Byung Chan</au><au>Kim, Jin Woong</au><au>Heo, Suk Hee</au><au>Lim, Hyo Soon</au><au>Jeong, Yong Yeon</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging</atitle><jtitle>Abdominal imaging</jtitle><stitle>Abdom Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Abdom Radiol (NY)</addtitle><date>2017-10-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2527</spage><epage>2537</epage><pages>2527-2537</pages><issn>2366-004X</issn><eissn>2366-0058</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To prospectively compare multidetector-row CT (MDCT) and MR imaging (MRI) in the assessment of the ablative margin (AM) and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency (RF) ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and assess whether non-contrast MRI with limited sequences (T1- and T2-weighted imaging only) was superior to a conventional MDCT protocol.
Methods
A total of 33 consecutive patients with 42 HCCs were included in this study. Both MDCT and MR images were independently reviewed by two radiologists regarding the ability to visually discriminate between the AM and index tumor, and the AM status within ablation zones. The AM status was classified as AM-plus (AM completely surrounding the tumor), AM-zero (AM was partly discontinuous, without protrusion of the tumor), and AM-minus (AM was partly discontinuous, with protrusion of the tumor). During the follow-up period, the cumulative local tumor progression rates were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. To determine the added value of contrast-enhanced MR images, both reviewers separately evaluated the two sets (unenhanced and enhanced) of MR images.
Results
Visual discrimination between the AM and index tumor was possible in four (9.5%) and 34 (81%) of the 42 ablation zones using MDCT and MRI, respectively (
p
< 0.001). Thirty-eight and four cases were classified as AM-plus and AM-zero on MDCT images, respectively, whereas the ablation zones were categorized as AM-plus (
n
= 32), AM-zero (
n
= 9), and AM-minus (
n
= 1) when examining the MR images. The cumulative incidence of local tumor progression was significantly lower in cases with AM-plus on MRI (
p
= 0.007). Contrast-enhanced MRI had no added value for the assessment of the AM and index tumor.
Conclusion
MRI was superior to MDCT for the differential assessment of the AM and index tumor immediately after RF ablation for HCC. Non-contrast MRI was also superior to the conventional MDCT protocol.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>28409202</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2366-004X |
| ispartof | Abdominal imaging, 2017-10, Vol.42 (10), p.2527-2537 |
| issn | 2366-004X 2366-0058 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1888678935 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Ablation Adult Aged Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - diagnostic imaging Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - surgery Catheter Ablation - methods Computed tomography Contrast Media Disease Progression Female Gastroenterology Hazards Hepatocellular carcinoma Hepatology Humans Image contrast Image enhancement Imaging Liver cancer Liver Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Liver Neoplasms - pathology Liver Neoplasms - surgery Magnetic resonance imaging Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Male Margins of Excision Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Prospective Studies Radio frequency Radio Waves Radiofrequency ablation Radiology Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods Treatment Outcome Visual discrimination |
| title | Imaging evaluation of ablative margin and index tumor immediately after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between multidetector-row CT and MR imaging |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T14%3A42%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Imaging%20evaluation%20of%20ablative%20margin%20and%20index%20tumor%20immediately%20after%20radiofrequency%20ablation%20for%20hepatocellular%20carcinoma:%20comparison%20between%20multidetector-row%20CT%20and%20MR%20imaging&rft.jtitle=Abdominal%20imaging&rft.au=Kim,%20Sung%20Mo&rft.date=2017-10-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2527&rft.epage=2537&rft.pages=2527-2537&rft.issn=2366-004X&rft.eissn=2366-0058&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00261-017-1146-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1888678935%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1941922968&rft_id=info:pmid/28409202&rfr_iscdi=true |