Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32869353›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2021

An optimal acquisition and post-processing pipeline for hybrid IVIM-DKI in head and neck.

Nienke D Sijtsema, Steven F Petit, Dirk H J Poot, Gerda M Verduijn, Aad van der Lugt, Mischa S Hoogeman, Juan A Hernandez-Tamames

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Differentiating Brain Metastasis and High-Grade Glioma Using Multi-b Value Diffusion MRI and Tumor Volumetry.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nienke D SijtsemaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7928-1578
Steven F PetitDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Dirk H J PootDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0656-2963
Gerda M VerduijnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Aad van der LugtDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Mischa S HoogemanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Juan A Hernandez-TamamesDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo optimize the diffusion-weighting b values and postprocessing pipeline for hybrid intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion kurtosis imaging in the head and neck region.

methodsOptimized diffusion-weighting b value sets ranging between 5 and 30 b values were constructed by optimizing the Cramér-Rao lower bound of the hybrid intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion kurtosis imaging model. With this model, the perfusion fraction, pseudodiffusion coefficient, diffusion coefficient, and kurtosis were estimated. Sixteen volunteers were scanned with a reference b value set and 3 repeats of the optimized sets, of which 1 with volunteers swallowing on purpose. The effects of (1) b value optimization and number of b values, (2) registration type (none vs. intervolume vs. intra- and intervolume registration), and (3) manual swallowing artifact rejection on the parameter precision were assessed.

resultsThe SD was higher in the reference set for perfusion fraction, diffusion coefficient, and kurtosis by a factor of 1.7, 1.5, and 2.3 compared to the optimized set, respectively. A smaller SD (factor 0.7) was seen in pseudodiffusion coefficient. The sets containing 15, 20, and 30 b values had comparable repeatability in all parameters, except pseudodiffusion coefficient, for which set size 30 was worse. Equal repeatability for the registration approaches was seen in all parameters of interest. Swallowing artifact rejection removed the bias when present.

conclusionTo achieve optimal hybrid intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion kurtosis imaging in the head and neck region, b value optimization and swallowing artifact image rejection are beneficial. The optimized set of 15 b values yielded the optimal protocol efficiency, with a precision comparable to larger b value sets and a 50% reduction in scan time.

Indexed as

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingDiffusion Tensor ImagingArtifactsHumansMotionReproducibility of Resultsbvalue optimizationdiffusion-weighted imaging (DWI)head and neckintravoxel incoherent motion diffusion kurtosis imaging (IVIM-DKI)non-Gaussian IVIM (NG-IVIM)swallowing artifact correction

Identifiers

PMID32869353
PMCPMC7693044
OpenAlexW3082925156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.