ArticleClinical imaging
Detection of different kidney stone types: an ex vivo comparison of ultrashort echo time MRI to reference standard CT.
Article in Clinical imaging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perioperative Fast-Track Surgery Nursing Intervention for Patients with Kidney Stone Disease under Computed Tomography Imaging.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2023Trial
- Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping of Kidney Stones: An Ex Vivo MRI Phantom Study.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Three Dimensional Ultra-short Echo Time MRI Can Depict Cholesterol Components of Gallstones Bright.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- MRI of the Colon in the Pharmaceutical Field: The Future before us.Pharmaceutics · 2019Review
- Current insights into the mechanisms and management of infection stones.Nature reviews. Urology · 2019Review
- The Capabilities and Limitations of Clinical Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Kidney Stones: A Retrospective Study.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeWith the development of ultrashort echo time (UTE) sequences, it may now be possible to detect kidney stones by using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In this study, kidney stones of varying composition and sizes were imaged using both UTE MRI as well as the reference standard of computed tomography (CT), with different surrounding materials and scan setups.
methodsOne hundred and fourteen kidney stones were inserted into agarose and urine phantoms and imaged both on a dual-energy CT (DECT) scanner using a standard renal stone imaging protocol and on an MRI scanner using the UTE sequence with both head and body surface coils. A subset of the stones representing all composition types and sizes was then inserted into the collecting system of porcine kidneys and imaged in vitro with both CT and MRI.
resultsAll of the stones were visible on both CT and MRI imaging. DECT was capable of differentiating between uric acid and nonuric acid stones. In MRI imaging, the choice of coil and large field of view (FOV) did not affect stone detection or image quality. The MRI images showed good visualization of the stones' shapes, and the stones' dimensions measured from MRI were in good agreement with the actual values (R(2)=0.886, 0.895, and 0.81 in the agarose phantom, urine phantom, and pig kidneys, respectively). The measured T2 relaxation times ranged from 4.2 to 7.5ms, but did not show significant differences among different stone composition types.
conclusionsUTE MRI compared favorably with the reference standard CT for imaging stones of different composition types and sizes using body surface coil and large FOV, which suggests potential usefulness of UTE MRI in imaging kidney stones in vivo.
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.