ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2024
Assessment of Osteoporosis at the Lumbar Spine Using Ultrashort Echo Time Magnetization Transfer (UTE-MT) MRI.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBone collagen-matrix contributes to the mechanical properties of bone by imparting tensile strength and elasticity, which can be indirectly quantified by ultrashort echo time magnetization transfer ratio (UTE-MTR) to assess osteoporosis. PURPOSE: To evaluate osteoporosis at the human lumbar spine using UTE-MTR. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: One hundred forty-eight-volunteers (age-range, 50-85; females, N = 90), including 81-normal bone density, 35-osteopenic, and 32-osteoporotic subjects. Ten additional healthy volunteers were recruited to study the intrasession reproducibility of the UTE-MT. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T/UTE-MT, short repetition-time adiabatic inversion recovery prepared UTE (STAIR-UTE), and iterative decomposition of water-and-fat with echo-asymmetry and least-squares estimation (IDEAL-IQ). ASSESSMENT: Fracture risk was calculated using Fracture-Risk-Assessment-Tool (FRAX). Region-of-interests (ROIs) were delineated on the trabecular area in the maps of bone-mineral-density, UTE-MTR, collagen-bound water proton-fraction (CBWPF), and bone-marrow fat fraction (BMFF). STATISTICAL TESTS: Linear-regression and Bland-Altman analysis were performed to assess the reproducibility of UTE-MTR measurements in the different scans. UTE-MTR and BMFF were correlated with bone-mineral-density using Pearson's regression and with FRAX scores using nonlinear regression. The abilities of UTE-MTR, CBWPF, and BMFF to discriminate between the three patient subgroups were evaluated using receiver-operator-characteristic (ROC) analysis and area-under-the-curve (AUC). Decision-curve-analysis (DCA) and clinical-impact curves were used to evaluate the value of UTE-MTR in clinical diagnosis. The DeLong test was used to compare the ROC curves. P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsExcellent reproducibility was obtained for the UTE-MT measurements. UTE-MTR strongly correlated with bone-mineral-density (r = 0.76) and FRAX scores (r = -0.77). UTE-MTR exhibited higher AUCs (≥0.723) than BMFF, indicating its superior ability to distinguish between the three patient subgroups. The DCA and clinical-impact curves confirmed the diagnostic value of UTE-MTR. UTE-MTR and CBWPF showed similar performance in correlation with bone-mineral-density and cohort classification. DATA
conclusionUTE-MTR strongly correlates with bone-mineral-density and FRAX and shows great potential in distinguishing between normal, osteopenic, and osteoporotic subjects. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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.