Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23192774›Full record

ArticleRadiology2013

Contrast-enhanced CT with a high-affinity cationic contrast agent for imaging ex vivo bovine, intact ex vivo rabbit, and in vivo rabbit cartilage.

Rachel C Stewart, Prashant N Bansal, Vahid Entezari, Hrvoje Lusic, Rosalynn M Nazarian, Brian D Snyder, Mark W Grinstaff

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Evaluation of a lanthanide nanoparticle-based contrast agent for microcomputed tomography of porous channels in subchondral bone.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel C StewartDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 590 Commonwealth Ave, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Prashant N Bansal
Vahid Entezari
Hrvoje Lusic
Rosalynn M Nazarian
Brian D Snyder
Mark W Grinstaff
Boston University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Characterizing electrostatic interactions between glycosaminoglycans and cationicR01GM098361 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI GRINSTAFF, MARK W., GUERMAZI, ALI · 2012 to 2015
$1.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM098361NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM098361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo quantify the affinity of a cationic computed tomography (CT) contrast agent (CA(4+)) and that of an anionic contrast agent (ioxaglate) to glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) in ex vivo cartilage tissue explants and to characterize the in vivo diffusion kinetics of CA(4+) and ioxaglate in a rabbit model. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll in vivo procedures were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee. The affinities of ioxaglate and CA(4+) to GAGs in cartilage (six bovine osteochondral plugs) were quantified by means of a modified binding assay using micro-CT after plug equilibration in serial dilutions of each agent. The contrast agents were administered intraarticularly to the knee joints of five New Zealand white rabbits to determine the in vivo diffusion kinetics and cartilage tissue imaging capabilities. Kinetics of diffusion into the femoral groove cartilage and relative contrast agent uptake into bovine plugs were characterized by means of nonlinear mixed-effects models. Diffusion time constants (τ) were compared by using a Student t test.

resultsThe uptake of CA(4+) in cartilage was consistently over 100% of the reservoir concentration, whereas it was only 59% for ioxaglate. In vivo, the contrast material-enhanced cartilage reached a steady CT attenuation for both CA(4+) and ioxaglate, with τ values of 13.8 and 6.5 minutes, respectively (P = .04). The cartilage was easily distinguishable from the surrounding tissues for CA(4+) (12 mg of iodine per milliliter); comparatively, the anionic contrast agent provided less favorable imaging results, even when a higher concentration was used (80 mg of iodine per milliliter).

conclusionThe affinity of the cationic contrast agent CA(4+) to GAGs enables high-quality imaging and segmentation of ex vivo bovine and rabbit cartilage, as well as in vivo rabbit cartilage. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12112246/-/DC1.

Indexed as

AnimalsCartilage, ArticularCationsCattleContrast MediaGlycosaminoglycansIoxaglic AcidMetabolic Clearance RateRabbitsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTissue DistributionTomography, X-Ray ComputedCationsContrast MediaGlycosaminoglycansIoxaglic Acid

Identifiers

PMID23192774
PMCPMC3528972
OpenAlexW2075403284

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.