Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26162930›Full record

ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2015

The repeatability of T2 relaxation time measurement of human knee articular cartilage.

Ilkka Hannila, Eveliina Lammentausta, Osmo Tervonen, Miika Tapio Nieminen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Repeatability of magnetic resonance fingerprinting TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2017
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ilkka HannilaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland. ilkka.hannila@ppshp.fi.
Eveliina LammentaustaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland.
Osmo TervonenDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland.
Miika Tapio NieminenDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland.
Oulu University Hospital · FIUniversity of Oulu · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess short- and long-term repeatability of T2 relaxation time measurements of the knee articular cartilage. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe right knees of nine asymptomatic volunteers (age 30-38 years, five male, four female) were imaged at 1.5 T in three sessions 1 and 2 weeks apart. To observe short-term repeatability, the measurements were repeated three times within one of the three imaging sessions for each volunteer. T2 relaxation time was mapped using a multi-slice multi-echo spin echo sequence in axial and sagittal planes. Cartilage was manually segmented and repeatability, as measured by root-mean-square coefficient of variation (CVRMS) was evaluated both for the entire bulk cartilage of each joint surface in the slice and separately for each region of interest (ROI) at different topographical locations and separately for the superficial and deep half of each ROI.

resultsFor bulk T2, the long-term repeatability was 3.2, 5.4, and 3.7%, and the short-term reproducibility was 3.9, 3.9, and 3.4% for bulk femoral, tibial, and patellar cartilage, respectively. There were no significant differences between long-term and short-term repeatability in superficial or deep cartilage when comparing CVRMS values (p = 0.338 and 0.700, respectively). For individual ROIs, the repeatability varied between 2.5 and 22.2% depending on the topographical location.

conclusionThe current results show mostly good repeatability. However, there were remarkable variations of T2 between bulk cartilage and different ROIs, bulk cartilage showing better repeatability. With careful patient positioning T2 can be accurately determined for different cartilage surfaces.

Indexed as

AdultCartilage, ArticularFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedKnee JointMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleReproducibility of ResultsCartilageMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI)RepeatabilityT2

Identifiers

PMID26162930
OpenAlexW2187030276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.