Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30800189›Full record

ArticlePolish journal of radiology2018

The advantages of a spine coil over a torso coil in magnetic resonance imaging examination of the sternoclavicular joints.

Artur Stefan Kusak, Michał Tomasz Podgórski, Piotr Grzelak, Adam Kwapisz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Artur Stefan KusakDiagnostic Imaging Department, Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Michał Tomasz PodgórskiDiagnostic Imaging Department, Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Piotr GrzelakDiagnostic Imaging Department, Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute, Lodz, Poland.
Adam KwapiszClinic of Orthopaedics and Paediatric Orthopaedics, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere are two standard methods for an magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination of the sternoclavicular joints: with loop coils and the patient in the prone position, or with torso coils with the patient in a supine position. In some centres these joints are examined with the spine coil in a patient laying prone. There are no reports on the advantages of this method. Our hypothesis is that despite different MRI systems, application of a spine coil will improve examination quality. MATERIAL AND

methodsTwenty-one healthy volunteers (10 female, 11 male, mean age 25 years) were randomised into three groups and scanned using three different MRI scanners (1.5T: Siemens Avanto, Philips Ingenia, 3.0T: Philips Achieva). Each volunteer was examined twice: using a standard protocol with a torso coil and with a spine coil, in prone position. The two groups were compared with regard to the intensity of motion artefacts using the χ

resultsApplication of a spine coil resulted in a significant decrease in the number of motion artefacts in all three planes (axial:

conclusionsApplication of a spine coil with the patient in a prone position is suitable for MRI evaluation of the sternoclavicular joints. It allows a higher signal-to-noise ratio and a lower intensity of motion artefacts to be obtained compared to a torso coil.

Indexed as

MRIprotocolspine coilsternoclavicular jointstechniquetorso coil

Identifiers

PMID30800189
PMCPMC6384401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.