Hepatocellular Carcinoma Post Embolotherapy: Imaging Appearances and Pitfalls on Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Embolotherapies used in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) include bland embolization, conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) using ethiodol as a carrier, TACE with drug-eluting beads and super absorbent polymer microspheres (DEB-TACE), and selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT). Successfully treated HCC lesions undergo coagulation necrosis, and appear as nonenhancing hypoattenuating or hypointense lesions in the embolized region on computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance. Residual or recurrent tumours demonstrate arterial enhancement with portal venous phase wash-out of contrast, features characteristic of HCC, in and/or around the embolized area. Certain imaging features that result from the procedure itself may limit assessment of response. In conventional TACE, the high-attenuating retained ethiodized oil may obscure arterially-enhancing tumours and limit detection of residual tumours; thus a noncontrast CT on follow-up imaging is important post-cTACE. Hyperenhancement within or around the treated zone can be seen after cTACE, DEB-TACE, or SIRT due to physiologic inflammatory response and may mimic residual tumour. Recognition of these pitfalls is important in the evaluation embolotherapy response.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".