Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25379439›Full record

SynthesisNeuroImage. Clinical2014

Assessment of blood-brain barrier disruption using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. A systematic review.

Anna K Heye, Ross D Culling, Maria Del C Valdés Hernández, Michael J Thrippleton, Joanna M Wardlaw

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 219 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
219citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
22.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

219 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 401 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Simultaneous measurement of water transport across the blood-brain and blood-CSF barrier in the human brain with arterial spin labeling MRI.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Quantitative assessment of flow between cerebrospinal and interstitial fluid compartments in humans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

159 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna K HeyeNeuroimaging Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Ross D CullingCollege of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Maria Del C Valdés HernándezNeuroimaging Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Michael J ThrippletonNeuroimaging Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Joanna M WardlawNeuroimaging Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
University of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is increasing recognition of the importance of blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption in aging, dementia, stroke and multiple sclerosis in addition to more commonly-studied pathologies such as tumors. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) is a method for studying BBB disruption in vivo. We review pathologies studied, scanning protocols and data analysis procedures to determine the range of available methods and their suitability to different pathologies. We systematically review the existing literature up to February 2014, seeking studies that assessed BBB integrity using T1-weighted DCE-MRI techniques in animals and humans in normal or abnormal brain tissues. The literature search provided 70 studies that were eligible for inclusion, involving 417 animals and 1564 human subjects in total. The pathologies most studied are intracranial neoplasms and acute ischemic strokes. There are large variations in the type of DCE-MRI sequence, the imaging protocols and the contrast agents used. Moreover, studies use a variety of different methods for data analysis, mainly based on model-free measurements and on the Patlak and Tofts models. Consequently, estimated K (Trans) values varied widely. In conclusion, DCE-MRI is shown to provide valuable information in a large variety of applications, ranging from common applications, such as grading of primary brain tumors, to more recent applications, such as assessment of subtle BBB dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease. Further research is required in order to establish consensus-based recommendations for data acquisition and analysis and, hence, improve inter-study comparability and promote wider use of DCE-MRI.

Indexed as

AgedAnimalsBlood-Brain BarrierContrast MediaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedContrast MediaBlood–brain barrierDynamic contrast-enhanced MRIPerfusionPermeability

Identifiers

PMID25379439
PMCPMC4215461
OpenAlexW2168127946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.