ArticleSkeletal radiology2020
With or without? A retrospective analysis of intravenous contrast utility in magnetic resonance neurography.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D MR Neurography of Craniocervical Nerves: Comparing Double-Echo Steady-State and Postcontrast STIR with Deep Learning-Based Reconstruction at 1.5T.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Delayed Ferumoxtran-10-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Neurography of the Lumbosacral Plexus: Impact on Vascular Suppression and Image Quality.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Article
- Advanced Imaging of the Peripheral Nerves, From theAJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2024Review
- Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance neurography for diagnosing brachial plexopathy: improved visualization and additional imaging features.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Improved 3D DESS MR neurography of the lumbosacral plexus with deep learning and geometric image combination reconstruction.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Society of skeletal radiology position paper - recommendations for contrast use in musculoskeletal MRI: when is non-contrast imaging enough?Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- The role of high-resolution ultrasound and MRI in the evaluation of peripheral nerves in the lower extremity.Journal of ultrasonography · 2023Article
- A pentavalent approach for the evaluation of traumatic brachial plexopathy on MRI: correlation of macropattern and micropattern.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Role of MR Neurography for Evaluation of the Lumbosacral Plexus: A Scoping Review.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2022Article
- Intravenous contrast does not improve detection of nerve lesions or active muscle denervation changes in MR neurography of the common peroneal nerve.Skeletal radiology · 2021Article
- Diagnostic contribution of contrast-enhanced 3D MR imaging of peripheral nerve pathology.Skeletal radiology · 2021Article
- Magnetic resonance neurography findings in three critically ill COVID-19 patients with new onset of extremity peripheral neuropathy.Polish journal of radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the utility of intravenous contrast in magnetic resonance neurography (MRN). MATERIALS AND
methodsA search of our PACS for MRN studies performed in 2015 yielded 74 MRN exams, 57 of which included pre- and post-contrast images. All studies were independently reviewed by 3 musculoskeletal radiologists with peripheral nerve imaging experience for presence/absence of nerve pathology, presence/absence of muscle denervation, and contrast utility score based on a 4-point Likert scale. The medical record was reviewed for demographic and clinical data.
resultsThe mean contrast utility score across all readers and all cases was 1.65, where a score of 1 indicated no additional information and a score of 2 indicated mild additional information/supports interpretation. The mean contrast utility score was slightly higher in cases with a clinical indication of amputation/stump neuroma or mass (2.3 and 2.1 respectively) and lower in cases with a clinical indication of trauma (1.5). The mean contrast utility score was lowest in patients undergoing MRN for pain, numbness, and/or weakness (1.2).
conclusionIntravenous contrast provides mild to no additional information for the majority of MRN exams. Given the invasive nature of contrast and recent concerns regarding previously unrecognized risks of repetitive contrast exposure, assessment of the necessity of intravenous contrast in MRN is important. Consensus evidence-based practice guidelines regarding intravenous contrast use in MRN are necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.