Table 1.
Patient | Age (years)/sex | Imaging techniquesa | Size (cm) | Imaging featuresb | Lymphadenopathyc | Short axis (cm) | Metastasesd | Ascitese | Pre-operative treatmente |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 28/M | MRI | 12.6 | H | TP | 1.1 | 0 | Y | |
2 | 39/F | CT | 8.5 | TN | 0 | Y | |||
3 | 20/M | CT | 17.7 | H, C, S | TP | 4.9 | 0 | ||
4 | 34/M | CT + MRI | 9.3 | FN | 0 | ||||
5 | 17/M | CT + MRI | 11.9 | C, S | FP | 2.0 | 0 | ||
6 | 23/M | CT | 18.3 | V | TP | 3.5 | IH, Lu, per, Pleu | Y | |
7 | 20/F | CT | 13.2 | B, C, S | TP | 7.4 | 0 | Y | |
8 | 13/M | CT | 13.6 | FP | 1.5 | Lu | Y | Y | |
9 | 30/M | CT | 10.2 | B, C, S | TN | 0 | |||
10 | 20/M | CT | 15.9 | B C, S | TP | 4.2 | 0 | Y | |
11 | 17/F | CT | 6.2 | TN | 0 | ||||
12 | 15/F | CT | 7.6 | B, S | TP | 5.4 | Per | Y | Y |
13 | 24/M | CT + MRI | 17.0 | H, C, S | TN | 0 | |||
14 | 17/M | CT + MRI | 11.5 | C, S | FN | 0 | |||
15 | 16/F | MRI | 4.8 | C, S | TN | 0 | |||
16 | 18/F | CT | 11.7 | FN | 0 | ||||
17 | 18/M | CT | 14.0 | B | TP | 8.6 | IH | ||
18 | 19/F | CT + MRI | 6.1 | B | TP | 2.8 | 0 | Y | |
19 | 39/M | CT | 10.3 | TP | 2.5 | Per | |||
20 | 16/F | MRI | 11.9 | TN | Lu, per | ||||
21 | 27/F | MRI | 9.7 | TN | 0 | ||||
22 | 22/F | CT | 15.0 | V, S | TP | 4.2 | 0 | Y | |
23 | 14/F | CT + MRI | 12.3 | B | FP | 1.8 | 0 | ||
24 | 15/F | CT + MRI | 13.1 | B, C, S | TP | 2.3 | Lu |
F, female; M, male.
Imaging techniques include CT or MRI.
Imaging features assessed include biliary dilatation (B), haemorrhage (H), calcifications (C), scar (S) and gross vascular invasion (V).
Lymphadenopathy (LAD) was classified as true positives (TPs), true negatives (TNs), false positive (FP) or false negative (FN) based on our reference standard.
Metastases were either intrahepatic (IH) or found in the lungs (Lu), peritoneum (Per) or pleura (Pleu).
Ascites and pre-operative treatment was noted when present (Y = yes).