RESUMEN
Abstract The power of computed tomography (CT) radiomics for preoperative prediction of microvascular invasion (MVI) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) demonstrated in current research is variable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the value of CT radiomics for MVI prediction in HCC, and to investigate the methodologic quality in the workflow of radiomics research. Databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched. The methodologic quality of included studies was assessed. Validation data from studies with Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement type 2a or above were extracted for meta-analysis. Eleven studies were included, among which nine were eligible for meta-analysis. Radiomics quality scores of the enrolled eleven studies varied from 6 to 17, accounting for 16.7%-47.2% of the total points, with an average score of 14. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and Area Under the summary receiver operator Characteristic Curve (AUC) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.77-0.86), 0.79 (95% CI 0.75-0.83), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.91) for the predictive performance of CT radiomics, respectively. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses showed radiomics model based on 3D tumor segmentation, and deep learning model achieved superior performances compared to 2D segmentation and non-deep learning model, respectively (AUC: 0.93 vs. 0.83, and 0.97 vs. 0.83, respectively). This study proves that CT radiomics could predict MVI in HCC. The heterogeneity of the included studies precludes a definition of the role of CT radiomics in predicting MVI, but methodology warrants uniformization in the radiology community regarding radiomics in HCC.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the concordance between CT and nucleic acid testing in diagnosing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outside its district of origin (Wuhan, China). METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive patients with COVID-19, confirmed by nucleic acid testing, were enrolled from two designated hospitals outside the district of disease origin. We collected clinical, laboratory, and CT data and assessed the concordance between CT manifestations and nucleic acid test results by comparing the percentage of patients with and without abnormal CT findings. Furthermore, using Chi-square tests, we analyzed the differences in CT manifestations between patients with and without an exposure history or symptoms. RESULTS: Multiple ground-glass opacities (GGOs), with or without consolidation, were observed on the initial CT scans of 19 patients (82.6%), whereas the remaining 4 (17.4%) showed no CT abnormalities, indicating that the initial chest CT findings were not entirely concordant with the nucleic acid test results in diagnosing COVID-19. Among the latter 4 patients, we observed multiple GGOs with and without consolidation in 2 patients on the follow-up chest CT scans taken on days 7 and 14 after admission, respectively. The remaining 2 patients showed no abnormalities on the follow-up CT scans. Furthermore, abnormal CT findings were found more frequently in patients who had been exposed to COVID-19 in its district of origin than in those who had not been exposed and in symptomatic patients than in asymptomatic patients (all p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with positive results on nucleic acid testing may or may not have the abnormal CT manifestations that are frequently found in symptomatic patients with a history of exposure to the district of COVID-19 origin.