Trial reportEuropean radiology2005
MR imaging of the small bowel with increasing concentrations of an oral osmotic agent.
Trial report in European radiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective randomized comparison between two MRI studies of the small bowel in Crohn's disease, the oral contrast method and MR enteroclysis.European radiology · 2007Trial
- Osmolarity: a decisive parameter of bowel agents in intestinal magnetic resonance imaging.European radiology · 2006Trial
- Bisacodyl micro-enema before MRI of rectal tumors: effects on rectum, image quality and patient acceptance.European radiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnostic performance of MRI for detection of intestinal fistulas in patients with complicated inflammatory bowel conditions.European radiology · 2007Article
- Value of cine MRI for better visualization of the proximal small bowel in normal individuals.European radiology · 2007Article
- Gradient-enhanced volume rendering: an image processing strategy to facilitate whole small bowel imaging with MRI.European radiology · 2007Article
- Assessment of colonic transit time using MRI: a feasibility study.European radiology · 2007Article
- Assessment of Crohn's disease in the small bowel: Prospective comparison of magnetic resonance enteroclysis with conventional enteroclysis.European radiology · 2006Article
- Bowel magnetic resonance imaging of pediatric patients with oral mannitol MRI compared to endoscopy and intestinal ultrasound.European radiology · 2006Article
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
The aim of this study was to assess the quality of MR imaging and level of adverse effects with increasing concentrations of gastrografin. This is a prospective study with 24 healthy volunteers which were randomised into four groups receiving 50%, 25%, 10% and 0% gastrografin. The endpoint was bowel image quality based on distension, signal homogeneity and wall delineation evaluated by three independent radiologists, and the maximum bowel diameter at three different levels. The subjects also scored any adverse events on a 1-5 scale. The interradiologist agreement was relatively good, with kappa values varying between 0.81 and 0.41. Improved bowel distension and image quality were achieved with increasing concentrations. But significant dose-response effects were found between increasing osmolalities and the bowel diameters and also versus the score of adverse events. The most frequent adverse reactions were diarrhea, nausea and lack of palatability. There is a gradient relationship between increasing osmolality of gastrografin and improved image quality and the score of adverse effects. The optimum concentration of gastrografin is dependent of the tolerance of the adverse events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.