Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26161783›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Increasing the Spatial Resolution of 3T Carotid MRI Has No Beneficial Effect for Plaque Component Measurement Reproducibility.

Diederik F van Wijk, Aart C Strang, Raphael Duivenvoorden, Dirk-Jan F Enklaar, Aeilko H Zwinderman, Rob J van der Geest, John J P Kastelein, Eric de Groot, Erik S G Stroes, Aart J Nederveen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
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

10 authors.

Diederik F van WijkDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Aart C StrangDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Raphael DuivenvoordenDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dirk-Jan F EnklaarDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Aeilko H ZwindermanDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Rob J van der GeestDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
John J P KasteleinDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Eric de GrootDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Erik S G StroesDepartment of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Aart J NederveenDepartment of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDifferent in-plane resolutions have been used for carotid 3T MRI. We compared the reproducibility, as well as the within- and between reader variability of high and routinely used spatial resolution in scans of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery disease. Since no consensus exists about the optimal segmentation method, we analysed all imaging data using two different segmentation methods. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn 31 patient with carotid atherosclerosis a high (0.25 × 0.25 mm2; HR) and routinely used (0.50 × 0.50 mm2; LR) spatial resolution carotid MRI scan were performed within one month. A fully blinded closed and a simultaneously open segmentation were used to quantify the lipid rich necrotic core (LRNC), calcified and loose matrix (LM) plaque area and the fibrous cap (FC) thickness.

resultsNo significant differences were observed between scan-rescan reproducibility for HR versus LR measurements, nor did we find any significant difference between the within-reader and between-reader reproducibility. The same applies for differences between the open and closed reads. All intraclass correlation coefficients between scans and rescans for the LRNC, calcified and LM plaque area, as well as the FC thickness measurements with the open segmentation method were excellent (all above 0.75).

conclusionsIncreasing the spatial resolution at the expense of the contrast-to-noise ratio does not improve carotid plaque component scan-rescan reproducibility in patients with atherosclerotic carotid disease, nor does using a different segmentation method.

Indexed as

AgedCarotid ArteriesFemaleFibrosisHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNecrosisPlaque, AtheroscleroticRadiographyReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID26161783
PMCPMC4498614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.