ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2020
Accuracy of non-contrast quiescent-interval single-shot and quiescent-interval single-shot arterial spin-labelled magnetic resonance angiography in assessment of peripheral arterial disease in a diabetic population.
Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of quiescent-interval-single-shot magnetic resonance angiography in peripheral arterial disease.European radiology · 2022Pooled it
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques in Peripheral Arterial Disease.Advances in wound care · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDiabetic patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are challenging to assess. Non-contrast magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) offers a safe alternative in patients with renal impairment. The study objective is to evaluate accuracy of lower limb quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) MRA and pedal QISS-arterial spin-labelled (ASL) MRA for detection of significant stenosis in diabetic patients with PAD.
methodsCombined QISS and QISS-ASL MRA was performed in 32 diabetic PAD patients (20 male, 12 female; mean 69 years; 8 with critical ischaemia). Two readers assessed haemodynamically significant (>50%) stenosis and diagnostic confidence on MRA, against digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard, with subgroup analysis of patients with severe renal impairment (n = 7). Inter-reader agreement of stenosis and diagnostic confidence were evaluated. Test-retest reproducibility was evaluated in 10 subjects who underwent repeat MRA on a different day.
resultsAt DSA, 262/645 segments (40.6%) had haemodynamically significant stenoses. MRA accuracy was 78.1% (478/612) and 75.6% (464/614), sensitivity 64.7% (161/249) and 77.5% (193/249), and specificity 87.3% (317/363) and 74.2% (271/365) for 2 readers. MRA accuracy was 80.9% and 80.7% for readers 1 and 2, respectively, in patients with severe renal impairment. QISS MRA but not pedal QISS-ASL MRA was considered of diagnostic image quality. Inter-reader agreement was moderate for stenosis (ĸ = 0.60) and diagnostic confidence (ĸ = 0.41). Test-retest reproducibility was high (ĸ = 0.87) and moderate (ĸ = 0.54) for individual readers.
conclusionsQuiescent-interval single-shot MRA has reasonable accuracy in a diabetic PAD population with high burden of disease, providing a non-contrast option in patients with renal impairment. QISS-ASL MRA requires further optimisation to be clinically feasible.
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.