English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We aim to gain further insight into identifying differential perfusion parameters and corresponding histogram parameters of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) from hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) on triphasic computed tomography (CT) scans. 90 patients with pathologically confirmed HCCs (n = 54) and IMCCs (n = 36) who underwent triple-phase enhanced CT imaging were included. Quantitative analysis of CT images derived from triphasic CT scans were evaluated to generate liver perfusion and histogram parameters. The differential performances, including the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), specificity, and sensitivity were assessed. The mean value, and all thepercentiles of the arterial enhancement fraction (AEF) were significantly higher in HCCs than in IMCCs. The difference in hepatic arterial blood supply perfusion (HAP) and AEF (ΔHAP = HAP tumor  − HAP liver , ΔAEF = AEF tumor  − AEF liver ) for the mean perfusion parameters and all percentile parameters between tumor and peripheral normal liver were significantly higher in HCCs than in IMCCs. The relative AEF (rAEF = ΔAEF/AEF liver ), including the mean value and all corresponding percentile parameters were statistically significant between HCCs and IMCCs. The 10th percentiles of the ΔAEF and rAEF had the highest AUC of 0.788 for differentiating IMCC from HCC, with sensitivities and specificities of 87.0%, 83.3%, and 61.8%, 64.7%, respectively. Among all parameters, the mean value of ∆AEF, the 75th percentiles of ∆AEF and rAEF, and the 25th percentile of HF tumor  exhibited the highest sensitivities of 94.4%, while the 50th percentile of rAEF had the highest specificity of 82.4%. AEF (including ΔAEF and rAEF) and the corresponding histogram parameters derived from triphasic CT scans provided useful value and facilitated the accurate discrimination between IMCCs and HCCs.

scientific reports

Value of perfusion parameters histogram analysis of triphasic CT in differentiating intrahepatic mass forming cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma