Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29674412›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2018

Comparison of 3T Intracranial Vessel Wall MRI Sequences.

A Lindenholz, A A Harteveld, J J M Zwanenburg, J C W Siero, J Hendrikse

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. MR Intracranial Vessel Wall Imaging: A Systematic Review.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

A LindenholzFrom the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands A.Lindenholz@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-5333-5723
A A HarteveldFrom the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3379-0710
J J M ZwanenburgFrom the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4282-5719
J C W SieroFrom the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5079-2868
J HendrikseFrom the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6384-6140

Funding

European Research Council 637024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIntracranial vessel wall MR imaging plays an increasing role in diagnosing intracranial vascular diseases. For a complete assessment, pre- and postcontrast sequences are required, and including other sequences, these result in a long scan duration. Ideally, the scan time of the vessel wall sequence should be reduced. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different intracranial vessel wall sequence variants to reduce scan duration, provided an acceptable image quality can be maintained. MATERIALS AND

methodsStarting from the vessel wall sequence that we use clinically (6:42 minutes), 6 scan variants were tested (scan duration ranging between 4:39 and 8:24 minutes), creating various trade-offs among spatial resolution, SNR, and contrast-to-noise ratio. In total, 15 subjects were scanned on a 3T MR imaging scanner: In 5 subjects, all 7 variants were performed precontrast-only, and in 10 other subjects, the fastest variant (4:39 minutes) and our clinically used variant (6:42 minutes) were performed pre- and postcontrast.

resultsThe fastest variant (4:39 minutes) had higher or comparable SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the intracranial vessel walls compared with the reference sequence (6:42 minutes). Qualitative assessment showed that the contrast-to-noise ratio was most suppressed in the fastest variant of 4:39 minutes and the variant of 6:42 minutes pre- and postcontrast. SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the fastest variant were all, except one, higher compared with the variant of 6:42 minutes (

conclusionsA 30% faster vessel wall sequence was developed with high SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios that resulted in good visibility of the intracranial vessel wall.

Indexed as

AdultBlood VesselsBrainFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedSignal-To-Noise Ratio

Identifiers

PMID29674412
PMCPMC6004122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.