Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improved Detection of Focal Liver Lesions at MR Imaging: Multicenter Comparison of Gadoxetic Acid–enhanced MR Images with Intraoperative Findings

Huppertz, Alexander, Balzer, Thomas, Blakeborough, Anthony, Breuer, Josy, Giovagnoni, Andrea, Heinz-Peer, Gertraud, Laniado, Michael, Manfredi, Riccardo M., Mathieu, Didier G., Mueller, Dieter, Reimer, Peter, Robinson, Philip J., Strotzer, Michael, Taupitz, Matthias, Vogl, Thomas J.·2004·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the detection of focal liver lesions, with results of histopathologic examination and/or intraoperative ultrasonography used as a standard of reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-nine patients who were known to have or suspected of having focal liver lesions and were scheduled for liver surgery were included in this study. Results in 131 patients could be included in the efficacy analysis. MR imaging was performed before and immediately and 20 minutes after bolus injection of 0.025 mmol/kg of the liver-specific hepatobiliary contrast agent gadoxetic acid. T1-weighted gradient-echo (with and without fat saturation and including dynamic data sets) and T2-weighted fast spin-echo/turbo spin-echo sequences were performed. All images were evaluated on site and by three independent and blinded off-site reviewers. Lesion matching based on the standard-of-reference results was performed. Differences in lesion detection with precontrast and with postcontrast MR images were assessed with the two-sided Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: Gadoxetic acid was well tolerated. In the on-site review, the number of patients in whom all lesions were correctly matched increased from 89 of 129 patients at precontrast MR imaging to 103 of 129 patients at postcontrast MR imaging. In the off-site evaluation, the number of patients in whom all lesions were correctly matched and the corresponding sensitivity values increased from 72 (55.8%), 68 (52.7%), and 66 (51.2%) with the precontrast images to 88 (68.2%), 69 (53.5%), and 76 (58.9%) with the postcontrast images for readers 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Two of the three blinded readers showed a statistically significant difference in lesion detection between precontrast and postcontrast MR imaging (P <.001 and P =.008). A large number of additionally correctly detected and localized lesions were smaller than 1 cm. CONCLUSION: MR imaging with gadoxetic acid is safe and improves lesion detection and localization.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2301020269

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Huppertz, A., Balzer, T., Blakeborough, A., Breuer, J., Giovagnoni, A., Heinz-Peer, G., Laniado, M., Manfredi, R. M., Mathieu, D. G., Mueller, D., Reimer, P., Robinson, P. J., Strotzer, M., Taupitz, M., & Vogl, T. J.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2004-01
Volume
230
Issue
1
Pages
266-275
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2120899599
Cited by
396
References
16
FWCI
10.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improved Detection of Focal Liver Lesions at MR Imaging: Multicenter Comparison of Gadoxetic Acid–enhanced MR Images with Intraoperative Findings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2301020269
The paper
Huppertz, A., Balzer, T., Blakeborough, A., Breuer, J., Giovagnoni, A., Heinz-Peer, G., Laniado, M., Manfredi, R. M., Mathieu, D. G., Mueller, D., Reimer, P., Robinson, P. J., Strotzer, M., Taupitz, M., & Vogl, T. J. (2004). Improved Detection of Focal Liver Lesions at MR Imaging: Multicenter Comparison of Gadoxetic Acid–enhanced MR Images with Intraoperative Findings. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2301020269

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.