ArticleBMC medical imaging2017
Improving the evaluation of cardiac function in rats at 7T with denoising filters: a comparison study.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of weighting algorithms to mitigate respiratory motion in free-breathing neonatal pulmonary radial UTE-MRI.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2024Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound elastography in the context of preclinical pharmacological research: significance for the 3R principles.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- An automatic restoration framework based on GPU-accelerated collateral filtering in brain MR images.BMC medical imaging · 2019Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe investigate the use of different denoising filters on low signal-to-noise ratio cardiac images of the rat heart acquired with a birdcage volume coil at 7T. Accuracy and variability of cardiac function parameters were measured from manual segmentation of rat heart images with and without filtering.
methodsTen rats were studied using a 7T Varian system. End-diastolic and end-systolic volumes, ejection fraction and left ventricle mass (LVM) were calculated from manual segmentation by two experts on cine-FLASH short-axis slices covering the left ventricle. Series were denoised with an anisotropic diffusion filter, a whole variation regularization or an optimized Rician non-local means (ORNLM) filtering technique. The effect of the different filters was evaluated by the calculation of signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios, followed by a study of intra- and inter-expert variability of the measurement of physiological parameters. The calculated LVM was compared to the LVM obtained by weighing the heart ex vivo.
resultsThe SNR and the CNR increased after application of the different filters. The performance of the ORNLM filter was superior for all the parameters of the cardiac function, as judged from the inter- and intra-observer variabilities. Moreover, this filtering technique resulted in the lowest variability in the LVM evaluation.
conclusionsIn cardiac MRI of rats, filtering is an interesting alternative that yields better contrast between myocardium and surrounding tissues and the ORNLM filter provided the largest improvements.
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.