ArticleRadiology2013
3.0-T MR imaging of intracoronary local delivery of motexafin gadolinium into coronary artery walls.
Article in Radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Contrast Agents for Assessment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2020Pooled it
- Intraluminal MRI and interventions: Innovation and application.EngMedicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Gliomas: Motexafin Gadolinium-enhanced Molecular MR Imaging and Optical Imaging for Potential Intraoperative Delineation of Tumor Margins.Radiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop a technique with clinical 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging to delineate local contrast agent distribution in coronary artery walls for potential molecular MR imaging-guided local gene or drug therapy of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis animal protocol was approved by the institutional animal care and use committee and was in compliance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. For in vitro confirmation, human arterial smooth muscle cells (SMCs) were used to determine capability of SMCs in uptake of motexafin gadolinium (MGd) and its optimal dose. For ex vivo evaluation, a 2-mL mixture of MGd and trypan blue was locally infused into coronary artery walls of six cadaveric pig hearts with MR monitoring and an MR imaging guidewire, surface coils, or both. For in vivo validation, the balloon catheter was placed into coronary arteries of seven living pigs, and the MGd and trypan blue mixture was infused into arterial walls with MR guidance. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of coronary artery walls were recorded by using different coils between pre- and postcontrast infusion, with subsequent histologic confirmation. Paired Student t tests were used to compare average SNRs and CNRs of arterial walls before and after contrast agent infusion with different coils.
resultsSMCs could take up MGd with the optimal concentration at 150 µmol/L. Average SNR with the MR imaging guidewire and surface coil combination was significantly higher than that with the MR imaging guidewire only or with surface coils only (P < .05), and average SNR and CNR of postinfusion MR imaging was significantly higher than that of preinfusion MR imaging (P < .05). Histologic analysis was used to confirm successful intracoronary infiltration of MGd and trypan blue within coronary artery walls.
conclusionMR imaging can be used to delineate locally infused contrast agent distribution in coronary artery walls. This establishes groundwork for development of molecular MR imaging-guided intracoronary therapy.
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.