Table 4 Comparison between the two studied groups according to different imaging parameters

 Non-necrotic

17 (18.1%)

14 (22.2%)

19.536*

< 0.001*

 Necrotic

74 (78.7%)

33 (52.4%)

 Cystic

3 (3.2%)

16 (25.4%)

Necrosis central/peripheral (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 Central

72 (97.3%)

30 (90.9%)

4.030

^MCp = 0.116

 Peripheral

0 (0%)

2 (6.1%)

 Central and peripheral

2 (2.7%)

1 (3%)

Margin regularity (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 Irregular

41 (55.4%)

16 (48.5%)

0.439

0.508

 Regular

33 (44.6%)

17 (51.5%)

Enhancing margin thickness (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 Thin

13 (17.6%)

5 (15.2%)

0.246

0.884

 Thick

56 (75.7%)

25 (75.8%)

 Very thick

5 (6.8%)

3 (9.1%)

Combined (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 Irregular + thin

3 (4.1%)

1 (3%)

2.292

^MCp = 0.867

 Irregular + thick

36 (48.6%)

13 (39.4%)

 Irregular + very thick

2 (2.7%)

2 (6.1%)

 Regular + thin

10 (13.5%)

4 (12.1%)

 Regular + thick

20 (27%)

12 (36.4%)

 Regular + very thick

3 (4.1%)

1 (3%)

Pattern/heterogeneity of central necrosis (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 Homogenous

21(28.4%)

9 (27.3%)

0.014

0.906

 Heterogeneous

53 (71.6%)

24 (72.7%)

Degree of rim enhancement in necrotic node (n = 107)

(n = 74)

(n = 33)

 ISO

68 (91.9%)

18 (54.5%)

24.112*

^MCp < 0.001*

 Hyper

2 (2.7%)

8 (24.2%)

 Mild hyper

4 (5.4%)

2 (6.1%)

 Very hyper

0 (0%)

5 (15.2%)