ArticleActa radiologica open2017
Reproducibility of pulmonary blood flow measurements by phase-contrast MRI using different 1.5 T MR scanners at two institutions.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of axial and sagittal spinal cord motion measurements in degenerative cervical myelopathy.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022Article
- A manifesto for cardiovascular imaging: addressing the human factor.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be beneficial for diagnosis of disease by offering quantitative information. However, reproducibility can be a major problem when there is a numerical threshold in multi-institution, multi-vendor situations. PURPOSE: To measure pulmonary blood flow with phase-contrast (PC) imaging using two different MR scanners (1.5 T) at different institutions in the same participants and to examine the reproducibility of the measurements. MATERIAL AND
methodsParticipants were 10 healthy volunteers (5 men; age range, 27-36 years). The measurements included the mean and maximal blood velocities, the mean blood flow volume, and the acceleration time and volume (AT and AV), derived from the time-flow curve of the PC-MRI. Simultaneously obtained maximal, minimal, and mean areas from regions of interest set in the pulmonary artery were also calculated. In order to calculate the reproducibility of the quantitative variables, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were employed. When an adequate ICC was obtained, Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to identify any systematic bias.
resultsThe ICCs were almost perfect for the mean blood flow volume and the AV (r = 0.82 and 0.80), and were substantial in the mean and maximal areas, and the AT (r = 0.63, 0.74, and 0.64, respectively). However, there was a fixed bias in the area measurement between the two scanners. Also, the AV had a proportional bias.
conclusionOur results reveal that various indices derived from PC-MRI on different MR scanners are promising as common indices for pulmonary flow assessment. Research and clinical use of PC-MRI for the pulmonary artery is expected to extend to multi-institution situations.
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.