ArticleRadiology2016
Use of Caval Subtraction 2D Phase-Contrast MR Imaging to Measure Total Liver and Hepatic Arterial Blood Flow: Preclinical Validation and Initial Clinical Translation.
Article in Radiology, 2016. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Serum Scoring and Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Intestinal Failure-Associated Liver Disease: A Feasibility Study.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Regularly incremented phase encoding - MR fingerprinting (RIPE-MRF) for enhanced motion artifact suppression in preclinical cartesian MR fingerprinting.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To validate caval subtraction two-dimensional (2D) phase-contrast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging measurements of total liver blood flow (TLBF) and hepatic arterial fraction in an animal model and evaluate consistency and reproducibility in humans. Materials and Methods Approval from the institutional ethical committee for animal care and research ethics was obtained. Fifteen Sprague-Dawley rats underwent 2D phase-contrast MR imaging of the portal vein (PV) and infrahepatic and suprahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC). TLBF and hepatic arterial flow were estimated by subtracting infrahepatic from suprahepatic IVC flow and PV flow from estimated TLBF, respectively. Direct PV transit-time ultrasonography (US) and fluorescent microsphere measurements of hepatic arterial fraction were the standards of reference. Thereafter, consistency of caval subtraction phase-contrast MR imaging-derived TLBF and hepatic arterial flow was assessed in 13 volunteers (mean age, 28.3 years ± 1.4) against directly measured phase-contrast MR imaging PV and proper hepatic arterial inflow; reproducibility was measured after 7 days. Bland-Altman analysis of agreement and coefficient of variation comparisons were undertaken. Results There was good agreement between PV flow measured with phase-contrast MR imaging and that measured with transit-time US (mean difference, -3.5 mL/min/100 g; 95% limits of agreement [LOA], ±61.3 mL/min/100 g). Hepatic arterial fraction obtained with caval subtraction agreed well with those with fluorescent microspheres (mean difference, 4.2%; 95% LOA, ±20.5%). Good consistency was demonstrated between TLBF in humans measured with caval subtraction and direct inflow phase-contrast MR imaging (mean difference, -1.3 mL/min/100 g; 95% LOA, ±23.1 mL/min/100 g). TLBF reproducibility at 7 days was similar between the two methods (95% LOA, ±31.6 mL/min/100 g vs ±29.6 mL/min/100 g). Conclusion Caval subtraction phase-contrast MR imaging is a simple and clinically viable method for measuring TLBF and hepatic arterial flow. Online supplemental material is available for this article.
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.