Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25907520›Full record

GuidelineAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2015

ASFNR recommendations for clinical performance of MR dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging of the brain.

K Welker, J Boxerman, A Kalnin, T Kaufmann, M Shiroishi, M Wintermark, American Society of Functional Neuroradiology MR Perfusion Standards and Practice Subcommittee of the ASFNR Clinical Practice Committee

Abstract readPractice Guideline
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 139 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
139citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

139 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Current state and advancements of imaging in acute ischemic stroke: a practical review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

79 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

7 authors.

K WelkerFrom the Department of Radiology (K.W., T.K.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota welker.kirk@mayo.edu.
J BoxermanDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging (J.B.), Rhode Island Hospital and Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
A KalninDepartment of Radiology (A.K.), Wexner Medical Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8850-4809
T KaufmannFrom the Department of Radiology (K.W., T.K.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
M ShiroishiDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology (M.S.), Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
M WintermarkDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Section (M.W.), Stanford University, Stanford, California.
American Society of Functional Neuroradiology MR Perfusion Standards and Practice Subcommittee of the ASFNR Clinical Practice Committee

Funding

Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium (PBTC)UM1CA081457 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI Ira J Dunkel, Arzu Onar-Thomas · 2014 to 2026
$41.4M
Southern California Clinical and Translational Science InstituteKL2TR000131 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BUCHANAN, THOMAS A · 2012 to 2015
$2.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000131NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA081457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MR perfusion imaging is becoming an increasingly common means of evaluating a variety of cerebral pathologies, including tumors and ischemia. In particular, there has been great interest in the use of MR perfusion imaging for both assessing brain tumor grade and for monitoring for tumor recurrence in previously treated patients. Of the various techniques devised for evaluating cerebral perfusion imaging, the dynamic susceptibility contrast method has been employed most widely among clinical MR imaging practitioners. However, when implementing DSC MR perfusion imaging in a contemporary radiology practice, a neuroradiologist is confronted with a large number of decisions. These include choices surrounding appropriate patient selection, scan-acquisition parameters, data-postprocessing methods, image interpretation, and reporting. Throughout the imaging literature, there is conflicting advice on these issues. In an effort to provide guidance to neuroradiologists struggling to implement DSC perfusion imaging in their MR imaging practice, the Clinical Practice Committee of the American Society of Functional Neuroradiology has provided the following recommendations. This guidance is based on review of the literature coupled with the practice experience of the authors. While the ASFNR acknowledges that alternate means of carrying out DSC perfusion imaging may yield clinically acceptable results, the following recommendations should provide a framework for achieving routine success in this complicated-but-rewarding aspect of neuroradiology MR imaging practice.

Indexed as

BrainHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeuroimagingNeurologyPerfusion ImagingRadiology

Identifiers

PMID25907520
PMCPMC5074767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.