ArticleInvestigative radiology2020
Accelerated T2 Mapping of the Lumbar Intervertebral Disc: Highly Undersampled K-Space Data for Robust T2 Relaxation Time Measurement in Clinically Feasible Acquisition Times.
Article in Investigative radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthy knee cartilage T2 mapping assessed with GRAPPATINI and multi-echo spin-echo (MESE) at 3T: regional values, longitudinal repeatability and method agreement.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- A new four-area method for evaluating biochemical changes in lumbar facet joint degeneration on T2* mapping.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Reproducibility and repeatability of quantitative T2 and T2* mapping of osteosarcomas in a mouse model.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- Biochemical changes in lumbar facet joint and disc degeneration by T2* mapping.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Feasibility of accelerated T2 mapping for the preoperative assessment of endometrial carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
T2 mapping of the intervertebral disc (IVD) can depict quantitative changes reflecting biochemical change due to loss of glycosaminoglycan content. Conventional T2 mapping is usually performed using a 2-dimensional multi-echo-spin echo sequence (2D-MESE) with long acquisition times that are generally not compatible with clinical routine. This study investigates the applicability of GRAPPATINI, a T2 mapping sequence combining undersampling, model-based reconstruction, and parallel imaging, to offer clinically feasible acquisition times in T2 mapping of the lumbar IVD. MATERIALS AND
methodsFifty-eight individuals (26 female; mean age, 23.3 ± 8.1 years) were prospectively studied at 3 T. GRAPPATINI was conducted with the same parameters as the 2D-MESE while shortening the acquisition time from 13:18 to 2:27 minutes. The setup was also validated in a phantom experiment using a 6.48-hour-long single echo-spin echo sequence as reference. The IVDs were manually segmented on 4 central slices.
resultsThe median nucleus pulposus showed a strong Pearson correlation coefficient between T2GRAPPATINI and T2MESE (rp = 0.919; P < 0.001). There was also a significant correlation for the ventral (rp = 0.241; P < 0.001) and posterior (rp = 0.418; P < 0.001) annular regions.In the single spin-echo phantom experiment, the most accurate T2 estimation was achieved using T2GRAPPATINI with a median absolute deviation of 15.3 milliseconds as compared with T2MESE with 26.5 milliseconds.
conclusionsGRAPPATINI facilitates precise T2 mapping at 3 T in accordance with clinical standards and reference methods using the same parameters while shortening acquisition times from 13:18 to 2:27 minutes with the same parameters.
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.