ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2014
Improve myocardial T1 measurement in rats with a new regression model: application to myocardial infarction and beyond.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regularly incremented phase encoding - MR fingerprinting (RIPE-MRF) for enhanced motion artifact suppression in preclinical cartesian MR fingerprinting.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2018Article
- Improved segmented modified Look-Locker inversion recovery T1 mapping sequence in mice.PloS one · 2017Article
- Manganese-enhanced MRI detection of impaired calcium regulation in a mouse model of cardiac hypertrophy.NMR in biomedicine · 2015Article
- Bolus arrival time and cerebral blood flow responses to hypercarbia.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2014Article
- Self-Gated Late Gadolinium Enhancement at 7T to Image Rats with Reperfused Acute Myocardial Infarction.Korean journal of radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo improve myocardial and blood T1 measurements with a multi-variable T1 fitting model specifically modified for a segmented multi-shot FLASH sequence.
methodsThe proposed method was first evaluated in a series of phantoms simulating realistic tissues, and then in healthy rats (n = 8) and rats with acute myocardial infarction (MI) induced by coronary artery ligation (n = 8).
resultsBy taking into account the saturation effect caused by sampling α-train pulses, and the longitudinal magnetization recovery between readouts, our model provided more accurate T1 estimate than the conventional three-parameter fit in phantoms under realistic gating procedures (error of -0.42 ± 1.73% versus -3.40 ± 1.46%, respectively, when using the measured inversion efficiency, β). The baseline myocardial T1 values in healthy rats was 1636.3 ± 23.4 ms at 7 Tesla. One day postligation, the T1 values in the remote and proximal myocardial areas were 1637.5 ± 62.6 ms and 1740.3 ± 70.5 ms, respectively. In rats with acute MI, regional differences in myocardial T1 values were observed both before and after the administration of gadolinium.
conclusionThe proposed method has improved T1 estimate as validated in phantoms and could advance applications in rodents using quantitative myocardial T1 mapping.
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.