ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2019
Evaluation of contrast agent dose and diffusion coefficient measurement on vessel size index estimation.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Two Methods of CBV Estimation in Two Groups of Grade III Gliomas with Different Appearance on Post-Contrast T1 Images.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2020Article
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
objectivesThe goal of this study is to examine the effect of contrast agent (CA) dose and diffusion coefficient on the estimation of vessel size index (VSI). MATERIALS AND
methodsThree groups of four participants were enrolled in this study and two different experiments were performed. Different dose of CA, namely 0.1 mmol/kg and 0.05 mmol/kg were assessed in two groups of normal subjects. Diffusion coefficient effect was assessed in the third group with high-grade glioma. Imaging included gradient echo and spin-echo DSC and DTI on a 3-T MR Scanner.
resultsVSI estimation using half of standard dose of CA showed higher values compared to the application of standard, with a ratio of 2 for the WM and 1.5 for the GM. VSI estimates for tumor tissues (22 µm) were considerably higher compared to contra-lateral Normal-Appearing WM (NAWM, 4 µm, P < 0.01) and Normal-Appearing GM (NAGM, 8 µm, P < 0.04). DISCUSSION: Application of standard dose for CA injection and also taking into account the effect of diffusion coefficient can lead to a better correlation of VSI with previous theoretically predicted values and improvement of individual diagnostics in tumor evaluations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31270714What 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.