Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21626179›Full record

ArticleDer Radiologe2011

[Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in animal models].

P M Paprottka, P Zengel, M Ingrisch, C C Cyran, M Eichhorn, M F Reiser, K Nikolaou, D-A Clevert

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Radiologe, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

P M PaprottkaInstitut für Klinische Radiologie, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Campus Großhadern, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 München. philipp.paprottka@med.uni-muenchen.de
P Zengel
M Ingrisch
C C Cyran
M Eichhorn
M F Reiser
K Nikolaou
D-A Clevert

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the past the detection of tumor perfusion was achieved solely via invasive procedures, such as intravital microscopy or with the help of costly modalities, such as multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), magnetic resonance tomography (MRT) or the combined use of positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT). Ultrasound offers the non-invasive display of organs without usage of ionizing radiation and it is widely available. However, colour-coded ultrasound and power Doppler do not allow the detection of tumor microcirculation. The introduction of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as well as new high-frequency ultrasound probes made it possible to detect and quantify tumor microcirculation with high resolution. CEUS has been used clinically on human beings for more than 10 years. During the last years different tumor models in experimental animals were used for the establishment of this new technique, e.g. in rats, hamsters and mice. CEUS allows the detection of functional parameters, such as the angiogenetic metabolic status of tissue pretreatment and posttreatment. Further research is required to solve the problems of absolute quantification of these perfusion parameters to allow the comparison of CEUS with other modalities (e.g. MRT and CT).

Indexed as

Contrast MediaDisease Models, AnimalAnimalsHumansImage EnhancementNeoplasms, ExperimentalPerfusion ImagingUltrasonographyContrast Media

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.