ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2022
Comparison of spin-echo echo-planar imaging magnetic resonance elastography with gradient-recalled echo magnetic resonance elastography and their correlation with transient elastography.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technical Success and Reliability of Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Patients with Hepatic Iron Overload.Academic radiology · 2024Article
- Strategies and Techniques for Liver Magnetic Resonance Imaging: New and Pending Applications for Routine Clinical Practice.Korean journal of radiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to assess the agreement between liver stiffness (LS) values obtained by the gradient-recalled echo (GRE) magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and spin-echo echo-planar imaging (SE-EPI) MRE with those of transient elastography (TE), respectively. METHODS We retrospectively included 48 participants who underwent liver MRE with both GRE and SE-EPI sequences in the same session and also TE within 1 year. We obtained LS values for MRE by drawing free-hand region of interest, and TE was performed using a FibroScan device. We assessed the relationship between the mean LS values obtained by each MRE sequence and TE using the correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots, respectively. We also compared LS values and technical failure rates of measured values from MRE between SE-EPI and GRE sequences using the paired t-test and McNemar's test. The MRE failure was defined as the absence of pixel value with a confidence index above 95%. RESULTS The LS values from SE-EPI and GRE sequences strongly correlated with those from TE (GRE; r = 0.73, P < .001 vs. SE-EPI; r = 0.79, P < .001). In addition, the LS values from the 2 MRE sequences showed excellent relationship (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.94 [0.89-0.97], P < .001). The LS values from SE-EPI and GRE MRE were not significantly different (4.14 kPa vs. 3.88 kPa, P = .19). Furthermore, the technical success rate of SE-EPI MRE was superior to that of GRE (100% vs. 83.8%, P = .031). CONCLUSION The measured LS values obtained using TE correlated strongly with those obtained using GRE and SE-EPI MRE techniques, even though SE-EPI-MRE resulted a higher technical success rate than GRE-MRE. Therefore, we believe that TE, GRE, and SE-EPI MR elastography techniques may complement each other according to the appropriate individual situation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.