Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33489488›Full record

ReviewCureus2020

Weight-Bearing Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Diagnostic Tool That Generates Biomechanical Changes in Spine Anatomy.

Brian Fiani, Daniel W Griepp, Jason Lee, Cyrus Davati, Christina M Moawad, Athanasios Kondilis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Letter to the Editor concerning "The influence of spinal position on imaging findings: an observational study of thoracolumbar spine upright MRI in elite gymnasts" by Fawcett L, et al. (Eur Spine J [2022]; 31(2):225-232).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

6 authors.

Brian FianiNeurosurgery, Desert Regional Medical Center, Palm Springs, USA.
Daniel W GrieppNeurosurgery, College of Osteopathic Medicine, New York Institute of Technology, Old Westbury, USA.
Jason LeeMedicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine, New York Institute of Technology, Old Westbury, USA.
Cyrus DavatiMedicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine, New York Institute of Technology, Old Westbury, USA.
Christina M MoawadNeurosurgery, Carle Illinois College of Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, USA.
Athanasios KondilisMedicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Weight-bearing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a unique modality in diagnostic imaging that allows for the assessment of spinal pathology in ways considered previously inaccessible or insufficient with the conventional MRI technique. Due to limitations in positioning within the MRI machine itself, difficulties would be posed in determining the underlying cause of a patient's pain or neurological symptoms, as the traditional supine position utilized can, in many cases, alleviate the severity of presented symptoms. Weight-bearing MRI addresses this concern by allowing a clinician to position a patient (to a certain degree) into flexion, extension, rotation, or side-bending with an axial load that can mimic physiologic conditions in order to replicate the conditions the patient experiences in order to give clinicians a clearer understanding of the anatomical relationship of the spine and surrounding tissues that may lead to a particular presentation of symptoms. These findings can then guide treatment approaches that are better tailored to a patient's needs in order to initiate treatment earlier and shorten the duration of treatment necessary for patient benefit. The goal of this review is to describe and differentiate weight-bearing MRI from conventional MRI as well as examine the advantages and disadvantages of either imaging modality. This will include assessing cost-effectiveness and improvements in clinical outcomes. Further, the advancements of weight-bearing MRI will be discussed, including potentially unique clinical applications in development.

Indexed as

axial loadingclinical efficacycost effectivenessdynamic mrineuroradiologyspinal stenosisspine imagingspondylosisupright mriweight bearing mri

Identifiers

PMID33489488
PMCPMC7805418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.