Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39199678›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

WFUMB Review Paper. Incidental Findings in Otherwise Healthy Subjects, How to Manage: Liver.

Roxana Șirli, Alina Popescu, Christian Jenssen, Kathleen Möller, Adrian Lim, Yi Dong, Ioan Sporea, Dieter Nürnberg, Marieke Petry, Christoph F Dietrich

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Roxana ȘirliDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, "Victor Babeș" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timișoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-0179-1014
Alina PopescuDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, "Victor Babeș" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timișoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-9141-7228
Christian JenssenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Krankenhaus Märkisch Oderland GmbH, 15344 Strausberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7008-6650
Kathleen MöllerMedical Department I/Gastroenterology, SANA Hospital Lichtenberg, 10365 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0009-0002-9492-0141
Adrian LimDepartment of Imaging, Imperial College London and Healthcare NHS Trust, London W6 8RF, UK.
Yi DongDepartment of Ultrasound, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200092, China.
Ioan SporeaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, "Victor Babeș" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timișoara, Romania.
Dieter NürnbergBrandenburg Institute for Clinical Ultrasound (BICUS) at Medical University Brandenburg "Theodor Fontane", 16816 Neuruppin, Germany.
Marieke PetryDepartment Allgemeine Innere Medizin (DAIM), Kliniken Hirslanden Beau Site, Salem und Permanence, 3013 Bern, Switzerland.
Christoph F DietrichDepartment Allgemeine Innere Medizin (DAIM), Kliniken Hirslanden Beau Site, Salem und Permanence, 3013 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6015-6347

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An incidental focal liver lesion (IFLL) is defined as a hepatic lesion identified in a patient imaged for an unrelated reason. They are frequently encountered in daily practice, sometimes leading to unnecessary, invasive and potentially harmful follow-up investigations. The clinical presentation and the imaging aspects play an important role in deciding if, and what further evaluation, is needed. In low-risk patients (i.e., without a history of malignant or chronic liver disease or related symptoms), especially in those younger than 40 years old, more than 95% of IFLLs are likely benign. Shear Wave liver Elastography (SWE) of the surrounding liver parenchyma should be considered to exclude liver cirrhosis and for further risk stratification. If an IFLL in a low-risk patient has a typical appearance on B-mode ultrasound of a benign lesion (e.g., simple cyst, calcification, focal fatty change, typical hemangioma), no further imaging is needed. Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) should be considered as the first-line contrast imaging modality to differentiate benign from malignant IFLLs, since it has a similar accuracy to contrast-enhanced (CE)-MRI. On CEUS, hypoenhancement of a lesion in the late vascular phase is characteristic for malignancy. CE-CT should be avoided for characterizing probable benign FLL and reserved for staging once a lesion is proven malignant. In high-risk patients (i.e., with chronic liver disease or an oncological history), each IFLL should initially be considered as potentially malignant, and every effort should be made to confirm or exclude malignancy. US-guided biopsy should be considered in those with unresectable malignant lesions, particularly if the diagnosis remains unclear, or when a specific tissue diagnosis is needed.

Indexed as

asymptomatic patientscontrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)incidental focal liver lesionultrasound

Identifiers

PMID39199678
PMCPMC11352778

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.