Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28056102›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Magnetic Particle Imaging (MPI): Experimental Quantification of Vascular Stenosis Using Stationary Stenosis Phantoms.

Sarah Vaalma, Jürgen Rahmer, Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos, Robert L Duschka, Jörn Borgert, Jörg Barkhausen, Florian M Vogt, Julian Haegele

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. On the partial volume effect in magnetic particle imaging.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Bare-Metal Stent Tracking with Magnetic Particle Imaging.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah VaalmaClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Jürgen RahmerResearch Laboratories, Philips Technologie GmbH Innovative Technologies, Hamburg, Germany.
Nikolaos PanagiotopoulosClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Robert L DuschkaClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Jörn BorgertResearch Laboratories, Philips Technologie GmbH Innovative Technologies, Hamburg, Germany.
Jörg BarkhausenClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Florian M VogtClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Julian HaegeleClinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9958-3362
University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein · DEPhilips (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic Particle Imaging (MPI) is able to provide high temporal and good spatial resolution, high signal-to-noise ratio and sensitivity. Furthermore, it is a truly quantitative method as its signal strength is proportional to the concentration of its tracer, superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIOs). Because of that, MPI is proposed to be a promising future method for cardiovascular imaging. Here, an interesting application may be the quantification of vascular pathologies like stenosis by utilizing the proportionality of the SPIO concentration and the MPI signal strength. In this study, the feasibility of MPI based stenosis quantification is evaluated based on this application scenario. Nine different stenosis phantoms with a normal diameter of 10 mm each and different stenoses of 1-9 mm and ten reference phantoms with a straight diameter of 1-10 mm were filled with a 1% Resovist dilution and measured in a preclinical MPI-demonstrator. The MPI signal intensities of the reference phantoms were compared to each other and the change of signal intensity within each stenosis phantom was used to calculate the degree of stenosis. These values were then compared to the known diameters of each phantom. As a second measurement, the 5 mm stenosis phantom was used for a serial dilution measurement down to a Resovist dilution of 1:3200 (0.031%), which is lower than a first pass blood concentration of a Resovist bolus in the peripheral arteries of an average adult human of at least about 1:1000. The correlation of the stenosis values based on MPI signal intensity measurements and based on the known diameters showed a very good agreement, proving the high precision of quantitative MPI in this regard.

Indexed as

Constriction, PathologicDiagnostic ImagingHumansMagnetite NanoparticlesPhantoms, ImagingSignal-To-Noise RatioMagnetite Nanoparticles

Identifiers

PMID28056102
PMCPMC5215859
OpenAlexW2571387731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.