ArticleJournal of biomedical engineering and medical imaging2017
Semiautomatic determination of arterial input function in DCE-MRI of the abdomen.
Article in Journal of biomedical engineering and medical imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modification of population based arterial input function to incorporate individual variation.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2018Article
- Variability in Quantitative DCE-MRI: Sources and Solutions.Journal of nature and science · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The goal of this study was to develop a semiautomatic segmentation technique of the abdominal aorta to determine the arterial input function (AIF). A total of 24 patients having therapy naïve abdominal cancers were imaged using DCE-MRI on a 3T MR scanner. DCE-MRI continued for 4.2 minutes with 2.1 seconds temporal resolution (120 acquisitions). Gadoteridol (0.1 mmol/kg) was infused intravenously at 30 seconds after starting DCE-MRI, and flushed with 20-ml saline (2 ml/s). Patients were instructed to hold breath after maximal inhalation, and repeat as needed to full inspiration. The location of the abdominal aorta was manually identified, but its segmentation and motion tracking were automatically implemented. AIFs determined in the aortic region with and without tracking motion were statistically compared. The aortic region was further segmented into multiple smaller regions, and the AIF change according to the size of the region of interest (ROI) was examined. The displacement of the abdominal aorta during DCE-MRI was 3.4±2.3 (mean±SD) mm. The root mean square error (RMSE) of AIF from the best fitting curve was 0.110±0.010 mM after motion correction, which was significantly smaller than that before motion correction (0.134±0.016 mM; p<0.001). The amplitude of AIF varied up to 15% according to the ROI size. However, when the radius of ROI was reduced more than 3 mm, the variation in AIF amplitude was less than 5%. Therefore the ROI having smaller radius than that of aorta will need to be used to determine a reliable AIF in abdominal DCE-MRI.
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.