ArticleEuropean radiology2017
Diffusion-weighted imaging with reverse phase-encoding polarity: the added value to the conventional diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating acute infarctions from hyperintense brainstem artifacts.
Article in European radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural connectome construction using constrained spherical deconvolution in multi-shell diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.Nature protocols · 2025Review
- Sex Differences in White Matter Diffusivity in Children with Developmental Dyslexia.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Improved detectability of acute and subacute brainstem infarctions by combining standard axial and thin-sliced sagittal DWI.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of our study was to assess the value of diffusion-weighted imaging with reverse phase-encoding polarity (R-DWI) in addition to conventional DWI using forward phase-encoding polarity (F-DWI) in differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts.
methodsSeventy-six patients with 38 hyperintense brainstem artefacts and 38 acute brainstem infarctions that had undergone F-DWI and R-DWI were retrospectively selected based on the clinicoradiological diagnosis. Four radiologists independently rated their confidence in diagnosing acute infarctions and ruling out brainstem artefacts in a blind manner, and then compared the diagnostic performance and confidence between F-DWI alone and F-DWI with R-DWI.
resultsThe areas under the curve determined for F-DWI with R-DWI in diagnosing infarctions were significantly higher than F-DWI alone for all readers (resident 1, 0.908 vs 0.776; resident 2, 0.908 vs 0.789; neuroradiologist, 0.961 vs 0.868; emergency radiologist, 0.934 vs 0.855, all p < 0.05). All readers were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI than F-DWI alone (all p < 0.05) for diagnosing acute brainstem infarction, and three readers (readers except the neuroradiologist) were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI for ruling out brainstem artefacts (p ≤ 0.001).
conclusionThe addition of R-DWI to F-DWI is a valuable method for differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts. KEY POINTS: • Hyperintense brainstem artefacts can be confused with acute infarctions on DWI. • Additional R-DWI to F-DWI reduces inter-reader variability in diagnosing brainstem infarctions. • Additional R-DWI improves performance and confidence for discriminating infarctions from artefacts.
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.