ReviewLa Radiologia medica2026
Functional hyperpolarized gas magnetic resonance imaging of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review.
Review in La Radiologia medica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the most common interstitial lung disease. New non-invasive tools to monitor pulmonary function, disease progression, and therapeutic response are needed. The study was aimed to investigate the role of hyperpolarized 3He and 129Xe MRI in IPF compared with pulmonary function tests and CT.
methodsA systematic literature review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A specific question based on PICO method was formulated to develop the search strategy, which was limited to English language articles focused on functional hyperpolarized gas MRI on patients affected by IPF. Exclusion criteria were represented by preclinical studies, studies on animals, studies on explanted lungs, conference abstracts, reviews, and case reports. Search was conducted up to September 30, 2025, via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Data extracted included gas volume inhaled, MRI metrics and sequences, CT imaging comparison, and pulmonary function tests comparison. QUADAS-2 and QUADAS-C were used to assess the risk of bias.
resultsThe inclusion criteria were met by 19 studies, which analyzed a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 34 patients. 129Xe was the most frequently employed gas. No defined MRI protocol emerged from the selected studies. A comparison between CT and hyperpolarized gas MRI showed conflicting results, whereas good correlations were observed between hyperpolarized gas MRI, spirometry, and DLco parameters. For example, the correlation between RBC to barrier and DLco was particularly strong (R = 0.94, p < 0.01). Finally, an overall medium/low risk of bias was found.
conclusionsHyperpolarized gas MRI was a potentially promising technique to assess disease progression, response to therapy and prognosis. Nevertheless, such technique needed standardized longitudinal multicenter clinical trials and larger samples to define imaging protocols and to test its capability in detecting IPF changes over time. CT must still be considered crucial in the diagnosis of IPF since typical hyperpolarized gas MRI metrics of IPF remain to be defined at present.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42414783What 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.