ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2011
3D fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging: reduced CSF artifacts and enhanced sensitivity and specificity for subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differentiating CSF flow artifacts from pathology: an educational review.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Current and future applications of brain magnetic resonance imaging in ARSACS.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Review
- Cerebrospinal fluid flow artifact reduction with deep learning to optimize the evaluation of spinal canal stenosis on spine MRI.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Article
- The pitfalls of interpreting hyperintense FLAIR signal as lymph outside the human brain.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Current approaches and advances in the imaging of stroke.Disease models & mechanisms · 2021Review
- Evaluation of cortical superficial siderosis in patients with cognitive dysfunction using 3D FLAIR and 3D DIR.European radiology · 2021Article
- An efficient 3D stack-of-stars turbo spin echo pulse sequence for simultaneous T2-weighted imaging and T2 mapping.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2019Article
- MRI quality assurance based on 3D FLAIR brain images.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2018Article
- Evaluation of prospective motion correction of high-resolution 3D-T2-FLAIR acquisitions in epilepsy patients.Journal of neuroradiology = Journal de neuroradiologie · 2018Article
- Effectiveness of 3D T2-Weighted FLAIR FSE Sequences with Fat Suppression for Detection of Brain MR Imaging Signal Changes in Children.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2016Article
- What are white matter hyperintensities made of? Relevance to vascular cognitive impairment.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2015Review
- Double inversion recovery MR sequence for the detection of subacute subarachnoid hemorrhage.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2015Article
- Comparison of 3D double inversion recovery and 2D STIR FLAIR MR sequences for the imaging of optic neuritis: pilot study.European radiology · 2014Article
- Usefulness of contrast enhanced FLAIR imaging for predicting the severity of meningitis.Journal of neurology · 2014Article
- Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery vascular hyperintensities are not visible using 3D CUBE FLAIR sequence.European radiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeFLAIR images are highly sensitive for SAH. However, CSF flow artifacts caused by conventional FLAIR can produce false-positive results. Here, we compare 3D and 3D FLAIR sequences, focusing on their potential for containing these artifacts and their sensitivity and specificity for detection of SAHs. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe evaluated the following 4 FLAIR sequences: 1) 2D FLAIR at 1.5T, 2) 2D FLAIR, 3) 2D PROPELLER-FLAIR, and 4) 3D Cube-FLAIR at 3T. All sequences were performed in 5 healthy volunteers; sequences 2 and 4 were also performed under routine conditions in 10 patients with focal epilepsy and in 10 patients with SAH. Two neuroradiologists independently conducted the analysis. The presence of flow artifacts in the ventricles and cisterns of healthy volunteers and patients with epilepsy was evaluated and scored on a 4-point scale. Mean values were calculated and compared by using paired t tests. Sensitivity and specificity for SAH detection in sequences 2 and 4 were determined.
resultsCube-FLAIR showed almost no CSF artifacts in the volunteers and the patients with epilepsy; therefore, it was superior to any other FLAIR (P < .001). Sensitivity and specificity of SAH detection by 3T FLAIR were 58.3% and 89.4%, respectively, whereas Cube-FLAIR had a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 100%.
conclusionsCube-FLAIR allows FLAIR imaging with almost no CSF artifacts and is, thus, particularly useful for SAH detection.
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.