SynthesisJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2021
Systematic Review of Magnetic Resonance Lymphangiography From a Technical Perspective.
Synthesis in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Near-Infrared Imaging of Indocyanine Green Identifies Novel Routes of Lymphatic Drainage from Metacarpophalangeal Joints in Healthy Human Hands.Lymphatic research and biology · 2023Trial
- Lymphatic evaluation with magnetic resonance lymphangiography in Fontan patients: Our single-center experience.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2025Article
- Response Letter to "Management of Chylothorax Following Thoracic Surgery" by Busetto et al.Thoracic cancer · 2025Article
- The utility of dynamic contrast-enhanced intranodal magnetic resonance lymphangiography (MRL) in the investigation of primary lymphatic anomalies.Clinical radiology · 2024Article
- Current diagnostic and quantitative techniques in the field of lymphedema management: a critical review.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2024Review
- Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics of Gadolinium-Based and Iron Oxide-Based Contrast Agents inside the Lymphatic Structure using Magnetic Resonance Lymphangiography.Molecular imaging and biology · 2024Article
- Magnetic resonance lymphangiography: Establishing normal.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2024Article
- Imaging Modalities for Evaluating Lymphedema.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Clinical application of magnetic resonance lymphangiography in the vascularized omental lymph nodes transfer with or without lymphaticovenous anastomosis for cancer-related lower extremity lymphedema.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- MRI of Lymphedema.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2023Review
- Imaging peripheral lymphatic dysfunction in chronic conditions.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
- Genetics etiologies and genotype phenotype correlations in a cohort of individuals with central conducting lymphatic anomaly.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Image registration and subtraction in dynamic magnetic resonance lymphangiography (MRL) of the legs.BJR case reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical examination and lymphoscintigraphy are the current standard for investigating lymphatic function. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) facilitates three-dimensional (3D), nonionizing imaging of the lymphatic vasculature, including functional assessments of lymphatic flow, and may improve diagnosis and treatment planning in disease states such as lymphedema. PURPOSE: To summarize the role of MRI as a noninvasive technique to assess lymphatic drainage and highlight areas in need of further study. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review. POPULATION: In October 2019, a systematic literature search (PubMed) was performed to identify articles on magnetic resonance lymphangiography (MRL). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: No field strength or sequence restrictions. ASSESSMENT: Article quality assessment was conducted using a bespoke protocol, designed with heavy reliance on the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool for case series studies and Downs and Blacks quality checklist for health care intervention studies. STATISTICAL TESTS: The results of the original research articles are summarized.
resultsFrom 612 identified articles, 43 articles were included and their protocols and results summarized. Field strength was 1.5 or 3.0 T in all studies, with 25/43 (58%) employing 3.0 T imaging. Most commonly, imaging of the peripheries, upper and lower limbs including the pelvis (32/43, 74%), and the trunk (10/43, 23%) is performed, including two studies covering both regions. Imaging protocols were heterogenous; however, T DATA
conclusionMRL is uniquely placed to yield large field of view, qualitative and quantitative, 3D imaging of the lymphatic vasculature. Despite study heterogeneity, consensus is emerging regarding MRL protocol design. MRL has the potential to dramatically improve understanding of the lymphatics and detect disease, but further optimization, and research into the influence of study protocol differences, is required before this is fully realized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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.