Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31081250›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2019

Fetal whole-heart 4D imaging using motion-corrected multi-planar real-time MRI.

Joshua F P van Amerom, David F A Lloyd, Maria Deprez, Anthony N Price, Shaihan J Malik, Kuberan Pushparajah, Milou P M van Poppel, Mary A Rutherford, Reza Razavi, Joseph V Hajnal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Cardiac neural representations for ECG-guided slice-to-volume reconstruction.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Advances in Fetal Cardiac Imaging and Intervention.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Advanced imaging of fetal cardiac function.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. The Feline Cardiomyopathies: 2. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2021
    Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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

10 authors.

Joshua F P van AmeromSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
David F A LloydSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maria DeprezSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Anthony N PriceSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Shaihan J MalikSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Kuberan PushparajahSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Milou P M van PoppelSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Mary A RutherfordSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Reza RazaviSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Joseph V HajnalSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

GLUTATHIONE IN BRAIN TUMOR RESISTANCE TO NITROSOUREASR29CA046410 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ALI-OSMAN, FRANCIS · 1988 to 1992
–
Medical Research Council Strategic Fund MR/K0006355/1Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Medical Engineering WT203148/Z/16/ZWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 102431
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop an MRI acquisition and reconstruction framework for volumetric cine visualization of the fetal heart and great vessels in the presence of maternal and fetal motion.

methodsFour-dimensional (4D) depiction was achieved using a highly-accelerated multi-planar real-time balanced steady-state free precession acquisition combined with retrospective image-domain techniques for motion correction, cardiac synchronization and outlier rejection. The framework was validated using a numerical phantom and evaluated in a study of 20 mid- to late-gestational age human fetal subjects (23-33 weeks gestational age). Reconstructed MR data were compared with matched ultrasound. A preliminary assessment of flow-sensitive reconstruction using the velocity information encoded in the phase of real-time images is included.

resultsReconstructed 4D data could be visualized in any two-dimensional plane without the need for highly specific scan plane prescription prior to acquisition or for maternal breath hold to minimize motion. Reconstruction was fully automated aside from user-specified masks of the fetal heart and chest. The framework proved robust when applied to fetal data and simulations confirmed that spatial and temporal features could be reliably recovered. Evaluation suggested the reconstructed framework has the potential to be used for comprehensive assessment of the fetal heart, either as an adjunct to ultrasound or in combination with other MRI techniques.

conclusionsThe proposed methods show promise as a framework for motion-compensated 4D assessment of the fetal heart and great vessels.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationFemaleFetal HeartHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMovementPhantoms, ImagingPregnancy4D reconstructioncardiac MRIcongenital heart diseasefetal imagingmotion correction

Identifiers

PMID31081250
PMCPMC6617816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.