Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26937439›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2015

Diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion tensor imaging in the evaluation of transplanted kidneys.

Stefano Palmucci, Giuseppina Cappello, Giancarlo Attinà, Pietro Valerio Foti, Rita Olivia Anna Siverino, Federica Roccasalva, Marina Piccoli, Nunziata Sinagra, Pietro Milone, Massimiliano Veroux and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging to assess diffuse renal pathology: a systematic review and statement paper.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stefano PalmucciRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Giuseppina CappelloRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Giancarlo AttinàRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Pietro Valerio FotiRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Rita Olivia Anna SiverinoRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Federica RoccasalvaRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Marina PiccoliRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Nunziata SinagraVascular Surgery and Organ Transplant Unit, Department of Surgery, Transplantation and Advanced Technologies, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Pietro MiloneRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Massimiliano VerouxVascular Surgery and Organ Transplant Unit, Department of Surgery, Transplantation and Advanced Technologies, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Giovanni Carlo EttorreRadiodiagnostic and Radiotherapy Unit, University Hospital "Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico - Vittorio Emanuele · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study is to investigate the relation between renal indexes and functional MRI in a population of kidney transplant recipients who underwent MR with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the transplanted graft.

methodStudy population included 40 patients with single kidney transplant. The patients were divided into 3 groups, on the basis of creatinine clearance (CrCl) values calculated using Cockcroft-Gault formula: group A, including patients with normal renal function (CrCl ≥ 60 mL/min); group B, which refers to patients with moderate renal impairment (CrCl > 30 but <60 mL/min); and, finally, group C, which means severe renal deterioration (CrCl ≤ 30 mL/min). All patients were investigated with a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner, acquiring DWI and DTI sequences. A Mann-Whitney U test was adopted to compare apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) and fractional anisotropy (FA) measurements between groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were created for prediction of normal renal function (group A) and renal failure (group C). Pearson correlation was performed between renal clearance and functional imaging parameter (ADC and FA), obtained for cortical and medullar regions.

resultsMann-Whitney U test revealed a highly significant difference (p < 0.01) between patients with low CrCl (group C) and normal CrCl (group A) considering both medullar ADC and FA and cortical ADC. Regarding contiguous groups, the difference between group B and C was highly significant (p < 0.01) for medullar ADC and significant (p < 0.05) for cortical ADC and medullar FA. No difference between these groups was found considering cortical FA. Analyzing groups A and B, we found a significant difference (p < 0.05) for medullar both ADC and FA, while no difference was found for cortical ADC and FA. Strongest Pearson correlation was found between CrCl and medullar ADC (r = 0.65). For predicting normal renal function or severe renal impairment, highest values of AUC were observed using medullar ADC cut-off values (respectively 0.885 and 0.871); medullar FA showed also high accuracy (respectively 0.831 and 0.853).

conclusionsDWI and DTI are promising tools for non-invasive monitoring of renal function; medullar ADC proved to be the best parameter for renal function assessment.

Indexed as

ADC, apparent diffusion coefficientAUC, area under the curveCrCl, creatinine clearanceDiffusion tensor imagingDiffusion weighted MRIDTI, diffusion tensor imagingDWI, diffusion weighted imagingFA, fractional anisotropyKidney transplantationMagnetic resonance imagingROC, receiver operating characteristic curveROI, region of interest

Identifiers

PMID26937439
PMCPMC4750625
OpenAlexW1820792122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.