ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2018
In vivo assessment of the placental anatomy and perfusion in a mouse model of intrauterine inflammation.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual-Targeted Nanotherapy Restores Redox Homeostasis and Suppresses Uterine Hypercontractility for Effective Preterm Birth Intervention.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Contrast-agent-free visualization of murine embryo-placental vasculature with ultrafast plane-wave ultrasound.Placenta · 2026Article
- Placental malperfusion in response to intrauterine inflammation and its connection to fetal sequelae.PloS one · 2019Article
- Dynamic glucose enhanced MRI of the placenta in a mouse model of intrauterine inflammation.Placenta · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides useful markers to examine placental function. MRI features of placental injury due to intrauterine inflammation-a common risk during pregnancy, are not well known. PURPOSE: To investigate the capability of structural MRI and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) imaging in examining acute placental injury in a mouse model of intrauterine inflammation, as well as gestation-dependent placental changes. STUDY TYPE: Prospective study. ANIMAL MODEL: Pregnant CD1 mice were scanned on embryonic day 15 (E15, n = 40 placentas from six dams) and E17. On E17, mice were subjected to intrauterine injury by exposure to lipopolysaccharide (LPS, n = 25 placentas from three dams) or sham injury (n = 25 placentas from three dams). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: In vivo MRI was performed on an 11.7T Bruker scanner, using a fast spin-echo sequence and a diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequence. ASSESSMENT: T STATISTICAL TESTS: Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the group differences.
resultsThe placental volume increased by ∼21% from E15 to E17 (P < 0.01), and a 15% volume loss was observed at 6 hours after LPS exposure (P < 0.01). IVIM parameters (f, D*, and f·D*) were similar between the E15 and E17 sham groups (P > 0.05), which was significantly reduced in the LPS-exposed placentas compared to the shams (P < 0.001). D values decreased from E15 to E17 (P < 0.05), which were further reduced after LPS exposure (P < 0.05). Changes in placental area and vascular density were histologically identified in the LPS-exposed group, along with gestation-dependent changes. DATA
conclusionOur results suggested structural MRI and IVIM measurements are potential markers for detecting acute placental injury after intrauterine inflammation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1260-1267.
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.