ArticleEuropean radiology2021
Determination of skeletal tumor extent: is an isotropic T1-weighted 3D sequence adequate?
Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fast Volumetric Imaging of Bone Using a Three-Dimensional Short TR Adiabatic Inversion Recovery Ultrashort Echo Time (STAIR-UTE) Sequence.NMR in biomedicine · 2025Article
- Bone tumors: state-of-the-art imaging.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- The role of imaging in extremity sarcoma surgery.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo test the hypothesis that an accelerated, T1-weighted 3D CAIPIRINHA SPACE sequence with isotropic voxel size offers a similar performance to conventional T1-weighted 2D TSE (turbo spin echo) for the evaluation of bone tumor extent and characteristics.
methodsThirty-four patients who underwent 3-T MRI with 3DT1 (CAIPIRINHA SPACE TSE) and 2DT1 (TSE) were included. Sequence acquisition time was reported. Two radiologists independently evaluated each technique for tumor location, size/length, tumor-to-joint distance, signal intensity, margin/extraosseous extension, and signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios.
resultsTumors were located in long (20/36, 55.5%) and pelvic (16/36, 44.4%) bones. 3DT1 sequence required an average acquisition time of 235 s (± 42 s, range 156-372), while two plane 2DT1 sequences combined (coronal and axial) had an average acquisition time of 381 s (± 73 s, range 312-523). There was no difference in the measurements of tumor length and tumor-to-joint distance (p = 0.95) between 3DT1 and 2DT1 images. Tumors were hypointense (17/36, 47.2% vs 17/36, 47.2%), isointense (12/36, 33.3% vs 12/36, 33.3%), or hyperintense (7/36, 19.4% vs 7/36, 19.4%) on 3DT1 vs 2DT1, respectively. Assessment of tumor margins and extraosseous extension was similar, and there was no difference in tumor SNR or CNR (p > 0.05).
conclusionsAn accelerated 3D CAIPIRINHA SPACE T1 sequence provides comparable assessments of intramedullary bone tumor extent and similar tumor characteristics to conventional 2DT1 MRI. For the assessment of bone tumors, the isotropic volume acquisition and multiplanar reformation capability of the 3DT1 datasets can obviate the need for 2DT1 acquisitions in multiple planes. KEY POINTS: • 3DT1 offers an equivalent performance to 2DT1 for the assessment of bone tumor characteristics, with faster and higher resolution capability, obviating the need for acquiring 2DT1 in multiple planes. • There was no difference in the measurements of tumor length and tumor-to-joint distance obtained on 3DT1 and 2DT1 images. • There was no difference in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) or contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) measures between 3DT1 and 2DT1.
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.