Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33118042›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2021

3D fast low-angle shot (FLASH) technique for 3T contrast-enhanced brain MRI in the inpatient and emergency setting: comparison with 3D magnetization-prepared rapid gradient echo (MPRAGE) technique.

Sohil H Patel, Prem P Batchala, Kellan Schallert, James T Patrie, Salma O Abbas, David A Ornan, Sugoto Mukherjee, Thomas Huerta, John P Mugler

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Voxel-Based Morphometry of Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Using a 3D Fast Low-angle Shot Localizer Image: A Comparison with Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Gradient Echo.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. MRI and MR angiography evaluation of pulsatile tinnitus: A focused, physiology-based protocol.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sohil H PatelDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. shp4k@virginia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9739-4362
Prem P BatchalaDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
Kellan SchallertDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
James T PatrieDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Salma O AbbasDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
David A OrnanDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
Sugoto MukherjeeDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
Thomas HuertaDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
John P MuglerDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
University of Virginia · USUniversity of Virginia Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of a 1-min contrast-enhanced 3D-FLASH pulse sequence for detecting intracranial enhancing lesions compared to standard contrast-enhanced 3D-MPRAGE pulse sequence.

methodsContrast-enhanced 3D-FLASH (acquisition time 49 s) and contrast-enhanced 3D-MPRAGE (4 min 35 s) pulse sequences were performed consecutively in 110 inpatient/emergency department 3T MRI brain examinations and analyzed by two independent neuroradiologist readers. For each sequence, the readers recorded (1) number of enhancing intracranial lesions; (2) intracranial susceptibility artifact (presence or absence; mm depth of intracranial signal loss); and (3) motion artifact (none, mild, moderate, severe). Inter and intra-reader agreement and reader accuracy relative to a reference standard were determined, and sequence comparison with respect to susceptibility and motion artifacts was performed.

resultsThere was substantial intra-reader, inter-sequence agreement [reader 1, κ = 0.70 (95% CI: [0.60, 0.81]); reader 2, κ = 0.70 (95% CI: [0.59, 0.82])] and substantial intra-sequence, inter-reader agreement [3D-MPRAGE assessment, κ = 0.76 (95% CI: [0.66, 0.86]); 3D-FLASH assessment, κ = 0.86 (95% CI: [0.77, 0.94]) for detection of intracranial enhancing lesions. For both readers, the diagnostic accuracy of 3D-FLASH and 3D-MPRAGE was similar (3D-MPRAGE: 86.4 and 88.1%; 3D-FLASH: 88.2 and 84.5%), with no inter-sequence diagnostic accuracy discordancy between the sequences for either reader. 3D-FLASH was associated with less susceptibility artifact (p < 0.001 both readers) and less motion artifact (p < 0.001 both readers).

conclusionOn 3T brain MRI in the inpatient and emergency department setting, 1-min 3D-FLASH pulse sequence achieved comparable diagnostic performance to 4.5 min 3D-MPRAGE pulse sequence for detecting enhancing intracranial lesions, with reduced susceptibility and motion artifacts.

Indexed as

InpatientsMagnetic Resonance ImagingBrainEmergency Service, HospitalHumansRetrospective StudiesBrainFLASHMotionMPRAGEMRI

Identifiers

PMID33118042
OpenAlexW3095736008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.