Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28715906›Full record

ArticleCartilage2018

T2* Mapping Provides Information That Is Statistically Comparable to an Arthroscopic Evaluation of Acetabular Cartilage.

Patrick Morgan, Mikko J Nissi, John Hughes, Shabnam Mortazavi, Jutta Ellermann

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cartilage, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What the papers say.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2017
    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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Patrick Morgan1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Mikko J Nissi2 Department of Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
John Hughes3 Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, CO, USA.
Shabnam Mortazavi4 Department of Radiology, Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jutta Ellermann4 Department of Radiology, Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
University of Minnesota · USColorado School of Public Health · USResonance Research (United States) · USUniversity of Eastern Finland · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives The purpose of this study was to validate T2* mapping as an objective, noninvasive method for the prediction of acetabular cartilage damage. Methods This is the second step in the validation of T2*. In a previous study, we established a quantitative predictive model for identifying and grading acetabular cartilage damage. In this study, the model was applied to a second cohort of 27 consecutive hips to validate the model. A clinical 3.0-T imaging protocol with T2* mapping was used. Acetabular regions of interest (ROI) were identified on magnetic resonance and graded using the previously established model. Each ROI was then graded in a blinded fashion by arthroscopy. Accurate surgical location of ROIs was facilitated with a 2-dimensional map projection of the acetabulum. A total of 459 ROIs were studied. Results When T2* mapping and arthroscopic assessment were compared, 82% of ROIs were within 1 Beck group (of a total 6 possible) and 32% of ROIs were classified identically. Disease prediction based on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.713 and a specificity of 0.804. Model stability evaluation required no significant changes to the predictive model produced in the initial study. Conclusions These results validate that T2* mapping provides statistically comparable information regarding acetabular cartilage when compared to arthroscopy. In contrast to arthroscopy, T2* mapping is quantitative, noninvasive, and can be used in follow-up. Unlike research quantitative magnetic resonance protocols, T2* takes little time and does not require a contrast agent. This may facilitate its use in the clinical sphere.

Indexed as

AcetabulumArthroscopyCartilage, ArticularContrast MediaHip JointHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificityContrast Mediahipquantitative cartilage imagingT2*

Identifiers

PMID28715906
PMCPMC6042035
OpenAlexW2736575571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.