ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2016
Comparison of 3 T and 1.5 T for T2* magnetic resonance of tissue iron.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- SCMR Position Paper (2020) on clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2020Guideline
- Cardiovascular magnetic resonance native TJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2020Pooled it
- Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) expert consensus for CMR imaging endpoints in clinical research: part I - analytical validation and clinical qualification.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2018Guideline
- Improved liver fat andMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Pathophysiology of LV Remodeling Following STEMI: A Longitudinal Diffusion Tensor CMR Study.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2023Article
- Free-breathing, non-ECG, simultaneous myocardial TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
- Detection of Intramyocardial Iron in Patients Following ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Using Cardiac Diffusion Tensor Imaging.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2022Article
- Myocardial T2* Imaging at 3T and 1.5T: A Pilot Study with Phantom and Normal Myocardium.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
- Cardiac MRI for Iron Overload in pediatric thalassemia patients- Right Age to Start in a Resource Constrained Environment.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2022Article
- 3 T: the good, the bad and the ugly.The British journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Relaxivity-iron calibration in hepatic iron overload: Reproducibility and extension of a Monte Carlo model.NMR in biomedicine · 2021Article
- Pituitary Volume and Iron Overload Evaluation by 3T MRI in Thalassemia.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2021Article
- Clinical Translation of Three-Dimensional Scar, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, Four-Dimensional Flow, and Quantitative Perfusion in Cardiac MRI: A Comprehensive Review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
- Reproducibility of liver iron concentration estimates in MRI through R2* measurement determined by least-squares curve fitting.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2020Article
- Cardiac TJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020Review
- Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 2017.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2018Review
- Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) minimizes interference from cellular pathology in R2* estimation of liver iron concentration.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2018Article
- Ultra-short echo time images quantify high liver iron.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2018Article
- Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) 2015-2016 and transition of the JCMR office to Boston.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017Review
- Age and sex corrected normal reference values of T1, T2 T2* and ECV in healthy subjects at 3T CMR.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundT2* magnetic resonance of tissue iron concentration has improved the outcome of transfusion dependant anaemia patients. Clinical evaluation is performed at 1.5 T but scanners operating at 3 T are increasing in numbers. There is a paucity of data on the relative merits of iron quantification at 3 T vs 1.5 T.
methodsA total of 104 transfusion dependent anaemia patients and 20 normal volunteers were prospectively recruited to undergo cardiac and liver T2* assessment at both 1.5 T and 3 T. Intra-observer, inter-observer and inter-study reproducibility analysis were performed on 20 randomly selected patients for cardiac and liver T2*.
resultsAssociation between heart and liver T2* at 1.5 T and 3 T was non-linear with good fit (R (2) = 0.954, p < 0.001 for heart white-blood (WB) imaging; R (2) = 0.931, p < 0.001 for heart black-blood (BB) imaging; R (2) = 0.993, p < 0.001 for liver imaging). R2* approximately doubled between 1.5 T and 3 T with linear fits for both heart and liver (94, 94 and 105 % respectively). Coefficients of variation for intra- and inter-observer reproducibility, as well as inter-study reproducibility trended to be less good at 3 T (3.5 to 6.5 %) than at 1.5 T (1.4 to 5.7 %) for both heart and liver T2*. Artefact scores for the heart were significantly worse with the 3 T BB sequence (median 4, IQR 2-5) compared with the 1.5 T BB sequence (4 [3-5], p = 0.007).
conclusionHeart and liver T2* and R2* at 3 T show close association with 1.5 T values, but there were more artefacts at 3 T and trends to lower reproducibility causing difficulty in quantifying low T2* values with high tissue iron. Therefore T2* imaging at 1.5 T remains the gold standard for clinical practice. However, in centres where only 3 T is available, equivalent values at 1.5 T may be approximated by halving the 3 T tissue R2* with subsequent conversion to T2*.
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.