Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. / Lund, Martin; Bjerre, Thomas Abramovitz; Grønbaek, Henning; Mortensen, Frank; Kragh Andersen, Per.

In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Vol. 2016, No. 10, CD012388, 10.10.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Lund, M, Bjerre, TA, Grønbaek, H, Mortensen, F & Kragh Andersen, P 2016, 'Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer', Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, vol. 2016, no. 10, CD012388. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012388

APA

Lund, M., Bjerre, T. A., Grønbaek, H., Mortensen, F., & Kragh Andersen, P. (2016). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2016(10), [CD012388]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012388

Vancouver

Lund M, Bjerre TA, Grønbaek H, Mortensen F, Kragh Andersen P. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016 Oct 10;2016(10). CD012388. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012388

Author

Lund, Martin ; Bjerre, Thomas Abramovitz ; Grønbaek, Henning ; Mortensen, Frank ; Kragh Andersen, Per. / Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016 ; Vol. 2016, No. 10.

Bibtex

@article{6444891c065241fdb540cb3a7ff9310c,
title = "Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer",
abstract = "This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To compare the accuracy of CEUS, CECT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET-CT for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly-diagnosed colorectal cancer. Potential sources of heterogeneity We will investigate the following potential sources of heterogeneity: the use of different reference standards. different ways of selecting the study populations, e.g. different inclusion and exclusion criteria. different locations of the study populations (country, state, region). age of participants in the study population. sex of participants in the study population. differences in clinician skills for the performance of CEUS.",
author = "Martin Lund and Bjerre, {Thomas Abramovitz} and Henning Gr{\o}nbaek and Frank Mortensen and {Kragh Andersen}, Per",
year = "2016",
month = oct,
day = "10",
doi = "10.1002/14651858.CD012388",
language = "English",
volume = "2016",
journal = "Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews",
issn = "1361-6137",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer

AU - Lund, Martin

AU - Bjerre, Thomas Abramovitz

AU - Grønbaek, Henning

AU - Mortensen, Frank

AU - Kragh Andersen, Per

PY - 2016/10/10

Y1 - 2016/10/10

N2 - This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To compare the accuracy of CEUS, CECT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET-CT for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly-diagnosed colorectal cancer. Potential sources of heterogeneity We will investigate the following potential sources of heterogeneity: the use of different reference standards. different ways of selecting the study populations, e.g. different inclusion and exclusion criteria. different locations of the study populations (country, state, region). age of participants in the study population. sex of participants in the study population. differences in clinician skills for the performance of CEUS.

AB - This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To compare the accuracy of CEUS, CECT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET-CT for diagnosing liver metastases in people with newly-diagnosed colorectal cancer. Potential sources of heterogeneity We will investigate the following potential sources of heterogeneity: the use of different reference standards. different ways of selecting the study populations, e.g. different inclusion and exclusion criteria. different locations of the study populations (country, state, region). age of participants in the study population. sex of participants in the study population. differences in clinician skills for the performance of CEUS.

U2 - 10.1002/14651858.CD012388

DO - 10.1002/14651858.CD012388

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:84990861347

VL - 2016

JO - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

JF - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

SN - 1361-6137

IS - 10

M1 - CD012388

ER -

ID: 179044779