ArticlePediatric radiology2021
Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging for determining bone marrow fat fraction at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: a technique to noninvasively assess cellularity and potential malignancy of the bone marrow.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative MRI Dixon signal drop and fat fraction for differentiating bone marrow lesions: a two-center prospective analysis.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- How I Do It: MRI of the Bone with Marrow-specific Sequences.Radiology · 2025Review
- The quantitative parameters derived from IDEAL-IQ in the lumbar vertebrae of healthy children: a pilot study of bone development.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Use of two-point and six-point Dixon MRI for fat fraction analysis in the lumbar vertebral bodies and paraspinal muscles in healthy dogs: comparison with magnetic resonance spectroscopy.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPediatric bone marrow assessment by MRI is challenging and primarily experiential and qualitative, with a paucity of clinically useful quantitative imaging techniques.
objectiveMRI fat fraction (MRI-FF) is a technique used to quantify the degree of fat in other organ systems. The purpose of this study was to assess whether MRI-FF accurately measures bone marrow composition. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis two-part study included a validation phase, followed by an application phase. For the validation phase, the MRI-FF of piglet bones (6 long bones, 8 axial bones) was performed at 1.5 tesla (T) and 3.0 T, and correlated to the histological fat fraction (H-FF). We used Bland-Altman plots to compare MRI-FF at 1.5 tesla T and 3.0 T. For the application phase, five children with malignant marrow disease were recruited along with seven age- and gender-matched control subjects. The MRI-FF in the children was correlated to the H-FF. Boxplots were used to compare the MRI-FF of patients and control subjects.
resultsFor the validation animal study, the MRI-FF of piglet bones at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T demonstrated moderate positive correlation to H-FF (r=0.41 and 0.42, respectively). MRI-FF at 1.5 T and 3.0 T were in good agreement, on average 7.7% apart. For the application phase, we included 5 children (4 with leukemia, 1 rhabdomyosarcoma) with median age 7 years, range (3-10 years). All children had MRI-FF and H-FF below 10%. The MRI-FF in patients (3.8±1.2) was significantly lower than that of control subjects (46.1±12.3%) (P<0.01).
conclusionMRI-FF is a valid technique to assess bone marrow fat fraction at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T. The MRI-FF in children with malignant marrow processes is significantly lower than in control subjects with normal marrow.
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.