ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021
Noninvasive evaluation of diabetic patients with high fasting blood glucose using DWI and BOLD MRI.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Diabetic Kidney Disease: From Pathophysiological Insights to Clinical Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Early Renal Changes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using Multiparametric MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Article
- Spectral computed tomography parameters could be surrogate imaging markers to detect early perfusion changes in diabetic kidneys.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Perspectives on the Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) for Noninvasive Evaluation of Diabetic Kidney Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the renal microstructure changes and hypoxia changes in type 2 diabetic patients and the relationship between them and glucose using both diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and blood oxygenation level-dependent magnetic resonance imaging (BOLD MRI).
methodsAfter measuring morning fasting blood glucose, DWI and BOLD MRI were performed in 57 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM group) and 14 healthy volunteers (NC group). According to the fasting blood glucose levels, diabetic patients were divided into a normoglycemic diabetes group (group A), a less hyperglycemic diabetes group (group B) and a more hyperglycemic diabetes group (group C). The renal parenchymal apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), renal cortical R2* (CR2*), and medullary R2* (MR2*) were measured, and the R2* ratio between the medulla and cortex (MCR) was calculated. To test for differences in ADC, R2*, and MCR among the four groups, the data were analyzed by separate one-way ANOVAs. The correlations between ADC, R2*, and MCR and the clinical index of renal function were analyzed.
resultsGroups B and C had significantly lower ADC values in the renal parenchyma (P = 0.048, 0.002) and significantly higher MR2* and MCR values (P < 0.000, P = 0.001, 0.001, and 0.005, respectively) than the NC group. ADC was negatively correlated with glucose, and MR2*, MCR and glucose showed a weak positive correlation.
conclusionDWI and BOLD may indirectly and qualitatively reflect the kidney microstructure status and hypoxia level of diabetic patients at different blood glucose levels to a certain extent, and possibly guide the clinical treatment of diabetic patients with different blood glucose levels.
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.