ArticleAbdominal imaging2015
Whole-organ and segmental stiffness measured with liver magnetic resonance elastography in healthy adults: significance of the region of interest.
Article in Abdominal imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- MR elastography: Principles, guidelines, and terminology.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Review
- T1ρ magnetic resonance imaging value as a potential marker to assess the severity of liver fibrosis: A pilot study.European journal of radiology open · 2021Article
- Assessment of liver fibrosis with liver and spleen magnetic resonance elastography, serum markers in chronic liver disease.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2020Article
- Normal range for MR elastography measured liver stiffness in children without liver disease.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020Article
- Improved imaging of colorectal liver metastases using single-source, fast kVp-switching, dual-energy CT: preliminary results.Polish journal of radiology · 2018Article
- Magnetic Resonance Elastography and Other Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques in Chronic Liver Disease: Current Status and Future Directions.Gut and liver · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMR elastography (MRE) is a recent non-invasive technique that provides in vivo data on the viscoelasticity of the liver. Since the method is not well established, several different protocols were proposed that differ in results. The aim of the study was to analyze the variability of stiffness measurements in different regions of the liver.
methodsTwenty healthy adults aged 24-45 years were recruited. The examination was performed using a mechanical excitation of 64 Hz. MRE images were fused with axial T2WI breath-hold images (thickness 10 mm, spacing 10 mm). Stiffness was measured as a mean value of each cross section of the whole liver, on a single largest cross section, in the right lobe, and in ROIs (50 pix.) placed in the center of the left lobe, segments 5/6, 7, 8, and the parahilar region.
resultsWhole-liver stiffness ranged from 1.56 to 2.75 kPa. Mean segmental stiffness differed significantly between the tested regions (range from 1.55 ± 0.28 to 2.37 ± 0.32 kPa; P < 0.0001, ANOVA). Within-method variability of measurements ranged from 14 % for whole liver and segment 8-26 % for segment 7. Within-subject variability ranged from 13 to 31 %. Results of measurement within segment 8 were closest to the whole-liver method (ICC, 0.84).
conclusionsStiffness of the liver presented significant variability depending on the region of measurement. The most reproducible method is averaging of cross sections of the whole liver. There was significant variability between stiffness in subjects considered healthy, which requires further investigation.
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.