ArticleEuropean radiology2021
Comparisons between image quality and diagnostic performance of 2D- and breath-hold 3D magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3T.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical evaluation of nnU-Net-based segmentation for enhanced MRCP maximum intensity projection visualization.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Motion Mitigation Techniques for Abdominal and Cardiac MR Imaging.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Review
- Evaluating the role of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in therapeutic decision-making for difficult common bile duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Deep learning reconstruction for accelerated 3-D magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Utility of the New Faster Compressed SENSE MRCP at 3 Tesla MRI in Children with Pancreatitis.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Predicting the image quality of respiratory-gated and breath-hold 3D MRCP from the breathing curve: a prospective study.European radiology · 2023Article
- Rapid 3D breath-hold MR cholangiopancreatography using deep learning-constrained compressed sensing reconstruction.European radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of 2D MRCP to those of breath-hold 3D MRCP using compressed sensing (CS-MRCP) and gradient and spin-echo (GRASE-MRCP) at 3T.
methodsFrom January to November 2018, patients who underwent pancreatobiliary MRI including 2D MRCP and two breath-hold 3D MRCP using CS and GRASE at 3T were included. Three radiologists independently evaluated image quality, motion artifact, and pancreatic cyst conspicuity. Diagnostic performance was assessed for bile duct anatomic variation, bile duct, and pancreatic diseases using a composite algorithm as reference standards. Pancreatic lesion detectability and conspicuity were evaluated using JAFROC and generalized estimating equation analysis.
resultsOne hundred patients (male = 50) were included. Bile duct anatomic variation, bile duct and pancreatic diseases were present in respectively 31, 15, and 79 patients. Breath-hold 3D MRCP provided better image quality than 2D MRCP (3.5 ± 0.6 in 2D MRCP; 4.0 ± 0.7 in GRASE-MRCP and 3.9 ± 0.8 in CS-MRCP, p < 0.001 for both). There was no difference in motion artifact between 2D and breath-hold 3D MRCP (p = 0.1). Breath-hold 3D CS-MRCP provided better pancreatic cyst conspicuity than 2D MRCP (2.7 [95% CI: 2.5-3.0] vs. 2.3 [95% CI: 2.1-2.5], p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between the diagnostic performance of the three sequences in the detection of bile duct anatomic variation or pancreatic lesions (p > 0.05).
conclusionBreath-hold 3D MRCP with GRASE or CS can provide better image quality than 2D MRCP in a comparable scan time. KEY POINTS: • Breath-hold 3D MRCP using compressed sensing (CS) or gradient and spin-echo (GRASE) provided a better image quality with less image blurring than 2D MRCP. • There were no significant differences between 2D MRCP and breath-hold 3D MRCP in either motion artifact or the number of non-diagnostic exams. • There were no significant differences between 2D MRCP and either type of breath-hold 3D MRCP in the diagnosis of bile duct anatomic variation or detection of pancreatic lesions.
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.