ArticleNeuroradiology2021
New technique: the use of the THRIVE sequence in the follow-up of patients who received endovascular intracranial aneurysm treatment.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of 3D time of flight MR angiography (TOF-MRA), contrast enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA), and T1-weighted high-resolution isotropic volume examination (THRIVE) at 3 T for the evaluation of intracranial aneurysm occlusion after endovascular treatment and to evaluate the usability of the THRIVE sequence in endovascular treatment follow-up.
methodsIn 3 T MR follow-up examinations of 66 aneurysms in 50 patients treated endovascularly, 3D TOF-MRA (index test), THRIVE (index test), and CE-MRA (reference standard) examinations were performed in a retrospective consecutive case series. Source images were classified as class 1, class 2, and class 3 according to the Raymond criteria using MIP (maximum intensity projection) techniques. The compatibility between sequences was evaluated with the Kappa test. The sensitivity and specificity were also calculated.
resultsIn the evaluation of THRIVE and CE-MRA sequences, compatibility was determined in 61 cases in total, with an overall fit of 61/66 (92.42%). A statistically significant correlation was found between THRIVE and CE-MRA (p < 0.001, κ = 0.800). In the evaluation of TOF and CE-MRA sequences, compatibility was determined in 54 cases in total, and the overall fit was 54/66 (81.8%). A statistically significant agreement was found between TOF and CE-MRA (p < 0.001, κ = 0.502). Assuming that CE-MRA is a reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of the TOF sequence were 44.4% and 97.9%, respectively, and the sensitivity and specificity of the THRIVE sequence were 77.8% and 97.9%, respectively.
conclusionThe THRIVE sequence can be used as a noncontrast method for monitoring endovascularly treated intracranial aneurysms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32914366What 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.