ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
New heights in CT differentiation of adrenal lesions and a rational definition of non-enhancement.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo explore the stratification and identification of adrenal lipid-poor adenomas (LPAs), adrenal cysts (ACs), and adrenal ganglioneuromas (AGNs) from each other using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT).
methodsPathologically confirmed, 348 patients were categorized into Model 1 (260 LPAs, 34 ACs), Model 2 (260 LPAs, 54 AGNs), and Model 3 (34 ACs, 54 AGNs). Statistical analyses were performed on the differences in the degree of enhancement in the arterial/venous phase (DEap/DEvp) (in HU) and the corresponding graded variables for the arterial/venous phase (GVap/GVvp). Models were evaluated via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and the Hosmer‒Lemeshow (HL) test.
resultsThe values of the area under the curve (AUC) for DEap, DEvp, GVap, and GVvp in Models 1-3 were 0.996, 1.000, 0.993, and 0.999; 0.980, 0.978, 0.961, and 0.975; and 0.734, 0.892, 0.725, and 0.883, respectively. The p values of the HL test were 0.984, 1.000, and 0.113, respectively. The DEvp interval values (in HU) for the LPAs, ACs, and AGNs were [4.9, 190.2] HU, [-3.7, 4.2] HU, and [-4.8, 41.8] HU, respectively. The GVap and GVvp ranges for the LPAs, ACs, and AGNs were [1, 6], [0, 2], and [0, 2] and [1, 6], [0, 1], and [0, 5], respectively.
conclusionsDEvp enhanced discrimination in Models 1 and 3, whereas DEap performed better in Model 2. Lesions with DEvp < 4.5 HU are likely represent non-enhancing pathology (e.g., cysts). When both GVap and GVvp are 0, when both GVap and GVvp are [2, 6], and when GVap is [3, 6] and GVvp is 6, LPA, AC, and AGN are excluded. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.