ReviewJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2017
Imaging near orthopedic hardware.
Review in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Musculoskeletal Infection Reporting and Data System (MSKI-RADS): reviewed and explained.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- [Revision analysis and successful solutions for my failed primary total knee arthroplasties].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Clinical implementation of MRI for evaluation of titanium press-fit osseointegration implants.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2025Article
- Adverse local tissue reactions in arthroplasty: opportunities and challenges for a common terminology across scientific, clinical and regulatory fields.EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Medical imaging diagnosis of orthopedic prosthesis-associated infections: a narrative review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Review
- Evaluating Hip Periprosthetic Joint Infection with Metal-artifact-reduction MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Article
- Producing micro-finite element models from real-time clinical CT scanners: calibration, validation and material mapping strategies.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Article
- The role of advanced metal artifact reduction MRI in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- Clinical evaluation of isotropic MAVRIC-SL for symptomatic hip arthroplasties at 3 T MRI.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2024Article
- MRI in MSK: is it the ultimate examination?Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Three-dimensional assessment of image distortion induced by active cardiac implants in 3.0T CMR.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Society of skeletal radiology position paper - recommendations for contrast use in musculoskeletal MRI: when is non-contrast imaging enough?Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Tibial bone defect prediction based on preoperative artefact-reduced CT imaging is superior to standard radiograph assessment.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- Numerical approach to investigate MR imaging artifacts from orthopedic implants at different field strengths according to ASTM F2119.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Imaging in Hip Arthroplasty Management Part 2: Postoperative Diagnostic Imaging Strategy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Development and evaluation of a numerical simulation approach to predict metal artifacts from passive implants in MRI.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Signal voids of active cardiac implants at 3.0 T CMR.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Clinical magnetic resonance imaging of arthroplasty at 1.5 T.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2020Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee.Polish journal of radiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Over one million total joint replacement surgeries were performed in the US in 2013 alone, and this number is expected to more than double by 2030. Traditional imaging techniques for postoperative evaluation of implanted devices, such as radiography, computerized tomography, or ultrasound, utilize ionizing radiation, suffer from beam hardening artifact, or lack the inherent high contrast necessary to adequately evaluate soft tissues around the implants, respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), due to its ability to generate multiplanar, high-contrast images without the use of ionizing radiation is ideal for evaluating periprosthetic soft tissues but has traditionally suffered from in-plane and through-plane data misregistration due to the magnetic susceptibility of implanted materials. A recent renaissance in the interest of imaging near arthroplasty and implanted orthopedic hardware has led to the development of new techniques that help to mitigate the effects of magnetic susceptibility. This article describes the challenges of performing imaging near implanted orthopedic hardware, how to generate clinically interpretable images when imaging near implanted devices, and how the images may be interpreted for clinical use. We will also describe current developments of utilizing MRI to evaluate implanted orthopedic hardware. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:24-39.
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.