Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28398929›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2017

Comprehensive Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced 3D Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast With Fat/Water Separation and High Spatiotemporal Resolution Using Radial Sampling, Compressed Sensing, and Parallel Imaging.

Thomas Benkert, Kai Tobias Block, Samantha Heller, Melanie Moccaldi, Daniel K Sodickson, Sungheon Gene Kim, Linda Moy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Thomas BenkertFrom the *Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research (CAI2R); and †Department of Radiology, Bernard and Irene Schwartz Center for Biomedical Imaging, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Kai Tobias Block
Samantha Heller
Melanie Moccaldi
Daniel K Sodickson
Sungheon Gene Kim
Linda Moy

Funding

TR&D 4: Revealing Microstructure: Biophysical modeling and validation for discovery and clinical careP41EB017183 · NIBIB · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Hersh Chandarana · 2014 to 2026
$19.3M
DCE MRI Study for Breast Cancer.R01CA160620 · NCI · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI KIM, SUNGHEON GENE · 2012 to 2023
$5.4M
Comprehensive Motion-Robust Pediatric MR Imaging Using Radial AcquisitionsR01EB018308 · NIBIB · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI CHANDARANA, HERSH · 2015 to 2018
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA160620NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB017183NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB018308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the applicability of Dixon radial volumetric encoding (Dixon-RAVE) for comprehensive dynamic contrast-enhanced 3D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast using a combination of radial sampling, model-based fat/water separation, compressed sensing, and parallel imaging. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant prospective study, 24 consecutive patients underwent bilateral breast MRI, including both conventional fat-suppressed and non-fat-suppressed precontrast T1-weighted volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE). Afterward, 1 continuous Dixon-RAVE scan was performed with the proposed approach while the contrast agent was injected. This scan was immediately followed by the acquisition of 4 conventional fat-saturated VIBE scans. From the comprehensive Dixon-RAVE data set, different image contrasts were reconstructed that are comparable to the separate conventional VIBE scans.Two radiologists independently rated image quality, conspicuity of fibroglandular tissue from fat (FG), and degree of fat suppression (FS) on a 5-point Likert-type scale for the following 3 comparisons: precontrast fat-suppressed (pre-FS), precontrast non-fat-suppressed (pre-NFS), and dynamic fat-suppressed (dyn-FS) images.

resultsWhen scores were averaged over readers, Dixon-RAVE achieved significantly higher (P < 0.001) degree of fat suppression compared with VIBE, for both pre-FS (4.25 vs 3.67) and dyn-FS (4.10 vs 3.46) images. Although Dixon-RAVE had lower image quality score compared with VIBE for the pre-FS (3.56 vs 3.67, P = 0.490), the pre-NFS (3.54 vs 3.88, P = 0.009), and the dyn-FS images (3.06 vs 3.67, P < 0.001), acceptable or better diagnostic quality was achieved (score ≥ 3). The FG score for Dixon-RAVE in comparison to VIBE was significantly higher for the pre-FS image (4.23 vs 3.85, P = 0.044), lower for the pre-NFS image (3.98 vs 4.25, P = 0.054), and higher for the dynamic fat-suppressed image (3.90 vs 3.85, P = 0.845).

conclusionsDixon-RAVE can serve as a one-stop-shop approach for comprehensive T1-weighted breast MRI with diagnostic image quality, high spatiotemporal resolution, reduced overall scan time, and improved fat suppression compared with conventional imaging.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaAdipose TissueAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreastBreast NeoplasmsBreath HoldingFemaleHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedProspective StudiesContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID28398929
PMCPMC5585043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.