Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow chart of patients’ inclusion and subgrouping.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Seventy-year-old woman who underwent right hemicolectomy and right hemihepatectomy because transverse colon cancer with liver metastasis.

(A, B) On follow-up CT, two newly developed metastases are seen in the remaining left lobe of the liver (arrows). (c, d) On non-enhanced CT images, low attenuating lesions were suspected at the same locations as those on contrast-enhanced CT, but neither of the reviewers could detect these lesions.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Per patient analysis of diagnostic performance in detection of newly developed hepatic metastasis (Group A).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Per lesion analysis of diagnostic performance in detection of newly developed hepatic metastasis (Group A).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of size of the metastatic nodules in NECT and the reference standard.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 3.

Seventy-two-year-old man who had known liver metastasis from gastric cancer.

a. On the portal venous phase, hepatic metastasis is seen in segment 4 of the liver. b. The size of the lesion appears similar in the non-enhanced CT image. This lesion was measured as 30 mm both in the contrast-enhanced CT (a) and non-enhanced CT (b) images. (c, d) On follow-up CT after 3 months, the lesion had increased in size. It was measured as 47 mm (57% interval increase) on contrast-enhanced CT, which suggested progression of disease (c). However, on non-enhanced CT, the mass was measured as 32 mm (7% interval increase), which suggested stable disease.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

Accuracy of response evaluation based on the RECIST 1.1 criteria.

More »

Table 4 Expand