Zhengyue Wang
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Interests
Zhengyue Wang has a total of 4 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Fang-Ying Mm Fan
Chinese PLA Medical College, Beijing, China
1 shared publication - Jie Yu
Department of Interventional Ultrasound, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing 100853, China
1 shared publication - Ping Liang
Department of Interventional Ultrasound, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing 100853, China
1 shared publication - Xueyong Chang
Chinese PLA Medical College, Beijing, China
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 10 September 2026
- Published by Springer Nature in Abdominal Radiology
- p. 1-13
Diagnostic performance of liver imaging reporting and data system ancillary features for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and evidence synthesis
Objective To systematically review and evaluate the evidence supporting the role of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) ancillary features (AFs) in optimizing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis across magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) modalities, with a focus on their incremental value in specific clinical scenarios. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed across PubMed and Embase from 2011 to 2024 to identify studies on LI-RADS AFs. Significant ancillary features (SAFs)—a review-specific descriptive framework rather than an official LI-RADS category—were defined as features demonstrating a statistically significant contribution to HCC diagnosis or LI-RADS diagnostic performance in at least one included study (p < 0.05). Results A total of 101 articles were included. In terms of imaging modality distribution, MRI was predominant (91.1%, 92/101), while CT (21.8%, 22/101) and CEUS (9.9%, 10/101) studies were relatively limited. For LI-RADS categories LR-1 to LR-5, fourteen SAFs were identified on MRI (e.g., hepatobiliary phase hypointensity, diffusion restriction). For lesions ≤ 3 cm, the incremental value of applying a single guideline-recommended AF was marginal. In contrast, applying combinations of ≥ 4 AFs significantly improved sensitivity by 10.6–18.3% without a significant loss of specificity. Evidence for CT-based AFs was limited and inconsistent. For CEUS LR-1 to LR-5 observations, six AFs were identified, with exploratory markers showing potential incremental value, whereas the two official AFs showed inconsistent performance. For LR-M lesions, 14 SAFs significantly contributed to differentiating HCC from other hepatic malignancies (p < 0.05). In treatment response assessment (TRA), five SAFs—two of which are guideline-recommended—improved diagnostic sensitivity by 3.2–42.8% without loss of specificity. Conclusion LI-RADS AFs enhance HCC diagnostic accuracy when complementing major features, with the most robust evidence supporting MRI-based AFs. In contrast, AFs based on CT and CEUS require further validation.
- 10 September 2026
- Published by Springer Nature in Abdominal Radiology
- p. 1-13
Diagnostic performance of liver imaging reporting and data system ancillary features for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and evidence synthesis
Objective To systematically review and evaluate the evidence supporting the role of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) ancillary features (AFs) in optimizing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis across magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) modalities, with a focus on their incremental value in specific clinical scenarios. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed across PubMed and Embase from 2011 to 2024 to identify studies on LI-RADS AFs. Significant ancillary features (SAFs)—a review-specific descriptive framework rather than an official LI-RADS category—were defined as features demonstrating a statistically significant contribution to HCC diagnosis or LI-RADS diagnostic performance in at least one included study (p < 0.05). Results A total of 101 articles were included. In terms of imaging modality distribution, MRI was predominant (91.1%, 92/101), while CT (21.8%, 22/101) and CEUS (9.9%, 10/101) studies were relatively limited. For LI-RADS categories LR-1 to LR-5, fourteen SAFs were identified on MRI (e.g., hepatobiliary phase hypointensity, diffusion restriction). For lesions ≤ 3 cm, the incremental value of applying a single guideline-recommended AF was marginal. In contrast, applying combinations of ≥ 4 AFs significantly improved sensitivity by 10.6–18.3% without a significant loss of specificity. Evidence for CT-based AFs was limited and inconsistent. For CEUS LR-1 to LR-5 observations, six AFs were identified, with exploratory markers showing potential incremental value, whereas the two official AFs showed inconsistent performance. For LR-M lesions, 14 SAFs significantly contributed to differentiating HCC from other hepatic malignancies (p < 0.05). In treatment response assessment (TRA), five SAFs—two of which are guideline-recommended—improved diagnostic sensitivity by 3.2–42.8% without loss of specificity. Conclusion LI-RADS AFs enhance HCC diagnostic accuracy when complementing major features, with the most robust evidence supporting MRI-based AFs. In contrast, AFs based on CT and CEUS require further validation.