You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Lipiodol retention pattern assessed by cone beam computed tomography during conventional transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma: accuracy and correlation with response
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Imaging, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40644-016-0090-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jungang Hu, Majid Maybody, Guang Cao, Xiao Wang, Hui Chen, Xu Zhu, Renjie Yang, Xiaodong Wang |
| Abstract |
To investigate accuracy of intraprocedural cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) compared to fluoroscopy for detection of lipiodol retention pattern during conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and its correlation with short-term response. Between September 2013 and July 2014, 29 patients with HCC underwent chemoembolization of 51 tumors (mean diameter 28.1 mm, range 10.0-136.3 mm). Lipiodol retention pattern was assessed by CBCT at the endpoint of cTACE compared by fluoroscopy. Depending on the pattern of tumor covered by lipiodol three classes were defined: complete (more than 90 %, no peripheral defects), moderate (50-90 %, some with or without peripheral defects), and poor (less than 50 %). Tumor response was assessed by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) based on follow-up contrast enhanced (CE) computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) obtained 4-6 weeks post-cTACE. Correlations between lipiodol retention patterns on CBCT and fluoroscopy as well as tumor response were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Of 51 hepatic tumors, 40 (78.4 %) had complete response (CR); 8 (15.7 %) had partial response (PR); 1 (2.0 %) had stable disease (SD); and 2 (3.9 %) had progressive disease (PD). The degree of lipiodol retention scored excellent, moderate, and poor, in fluoroscopic images vs CBCT images were 23 (45.1 %) vs 39 (76.5 %), 19 (37.3 %) vs 11 (21.6 %), and 9 (17.6 %) vs 1 (2.0 %), respectively. Lipiodol retention assessment with CBCT (Az = 0.75) is more accurate than fluoroscopy (Az = 0.54) in predicting target tumor response. Other than lipiodol retention pattern assessed with CBCT (p = 0.01), tumor size (p = 0.04) is an independent predictors of CR. CBCT is more accurate than fluoroscopy in classification of lipiodol retention pattern in HCC tumors at the time of cTACE. CBCT could be used as a reliable intra precedural monitoring modality of cTACE. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 24% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 47% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 6% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Imaging
#445
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,432
of 329,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Imaging
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,220 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.