ArticleRadiological physics and technology2017
Evaluation of six-point modified dixon and magnetic resonance spectroscopy for fat quantification: a fat-water-iron phantom study.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative MRI of diffuse liver diseases: techniques and tissue-mimicking phantoms.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Review
- A comparison of emulsifiers for the formation of oil-in-water emulsions: stability of the emulsions within 9 h after production and MR signal properties.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- A hybrid (iron-fat-water) phantom for liver iron overload quantification in the presence of contaminating fat using magnetic resonance imaging.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- Fat-Water Phantoms for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Validation: A Flexible and Scalable Protocol.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2018Article
- Influence of Gd-EOB-DTPA on T1 dependence of the proton density fat fraction using magnetic resonance spectroscopy.Radiological physics and technology · 2018Article
- Influence of Gd-EOB-DTPA on proton density fat fraction using the six-echo Dixon method in 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.Radiological physics and technology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate (1) the agreement between the true fat fraction (FF) and proton density FF (PDFF) measured using a six-echo modified Dixon (6mDixon) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and (2) the influence of fat on T2* values. The study was performed using phantoms of varying fat and iron content. Point-resolved spectroscopy (PRESS) and stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM) with single-echo (S) and multiecho (M) (PRESS-S, PRESS-M, STEAM-S, and STEAM-M) were used for MRS. In phantoms without iron, the agreement between the true FF and measured PDFF was tested using Bland-Altman analysis. The influence of iron on PDFF was evaluated in phantoms with iron. The relationship between the true FF and T2* value was assessed in phantoms without iron, wherein the mean differences (limits of agreement) for each method were as follows: 6mDixon 2.9% (-2.4 to 8.1%); STEAM-S 3.2% (-9.5 to 16.0%); STEAM-M -0.7% (-6.9 to 5.5%); PRESS-S 8.9% (-14.5 to 32.4%); and PRESS-M -5.8% (-18.3 to 6.7%). In the 20% fat phantoms with iron, as iron increased, PDFFs with STEAM-S, PRESS-S, and PRESS-M were considerably overestimated, while, PDFF with STEAM-M was stable at 0.04-0.2 mM iron concentrations (17.2 and 21.4%, respectively), and PDFF with 6mDixon was reliable at even 0.4 mM iron concentration (24.8%). The T2* value showed a negative correlation with the true FF (r = -0.942, P = 0.005). STEAM-M and 6mDixon were reliable methods of fat quantification in the absence of iron, and the T2* value was shortened by fat.
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.