Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31444580›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2019

Diagnostic value of alternative techniques to gadolinium-based contrast agents in MR neuroimaging-a comprehensive overview.

Anna Falk Delgado, Danielle Van Westen, Markus Nilsson, Linda Knutsson, Pia C Sundgren, Elna-Marie Larsson, Alberto Falk Delgado

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna Falk DelgadoClinical neurosciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. anna.falk-delgado@neuroradkarolinska.se.
Danielle Van WestenDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Markus NilssonDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Linda KnutssonDepartment of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Pia C SundgrenDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Elna-Marie LarssonDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Alberto Falk DelgadoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Lund University · SEUppsala University · SEJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) increase lesion detection and improve disease characterization for many cerebral pathologies investigated with MRI. These agents, introduced in the late 1980s, are in wide use today. However, some non-ionic linear GBCAs have been associated with the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in patients with kidney failure. Gadolinium deposition has also been found in deep brain structures, although it is of unclear clinical relevance. Hence, new guidelines from the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine advocate cautious use of GBCA in clinical and research practice. Some linear GBCAs were restricted from use by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2017.This review focuses on non-contrast-enhanced MRI techniques that can serve as alternatives for the use of GBCAs. Clinical studies on the diagnostic performance of non-contrast-enhanced as well as contrast-enhanced MRI methods, both well established and newly proposed, were included. Advantages and disadvantages together with the diagnostic performance of each method are detailed. Non-contrast-enhanced MRIs discussed in this review are arterial spin labeling (ASL), time of flight (TOF), phase contrast (PC), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI), and amide proton transfer (APT) imaging.Ten common diseases were identified for which studies reported comparisons of non-contrast-enhanced and contrast-enhanced MRI. These specific diseases include primary brain tumors, metastases, abscess, multiple sclerosis, and vascular conditions such as aneurysm, arteriovenous malformation, arteriovenous fistula, intracranial carotid artery occlusive disease, hemorrhagic, and ischemic stroke.In general, non-contrast-enhanced techniques showed comparable diagnostic performance to contrast-enhanced MRI for specific diagnostic questions. However, some diagnoses still require contrast-enhanced imaging for a complete examination.

Indexed as

Area under curveBrainDiagnostic performanceGadoliniumNon-contrast-enhanced

Identifiers

PMID31444580
PMCPMC6708018
OpenAlexW2969729739

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.