Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34009407›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2021

Utilization of 3-T fetal magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice: a single-institution experience.

Usha D Nagaraj, Maria A Calvo-Garcia, A Carl Merrow, Bin Zhang, Jean A Tkach, Beth M Kline-Fath

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2021. 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
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. ISUOG Practice Guidelines (updated): performance of fetal magnetic resonance imaging.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2023
    Article
  6. Magnetic resonance imaging of the monkey fetal brain in utero.Investigative magnetic resonance imaging · 2022
    Article
  7. Clinical Applications of Fetal MRI in the Brain.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Usha D NagarajDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA. usha.nagaraj@cchmc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8251-7481
Maria A Calvo-GarciaDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
A Carl MerrowDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
Bin ZhangDepartment of Biostatistics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Jean A TkachDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
Beth M Kline-FathDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the safety and efficacy of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3 tesla (T) continues to evolve, understanding its potential benefits and limitations is becoming increasingly important.

objectiveWe aim to compare the image quality of fetal MRI between 1.5 T and 3 T in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND

methodsFetal MRIs performed at 3 T between Jan. 1, 2019, and Dec. 31, 2019, at our institution were retrospectively reviewed by four fellowship-trained subspecialty radiologists. Imaging quality by system, sequence and artifacts were compared with matched controls at 1.5 T and rated using a modified Likert scale.

resultsThirty-three fetal MRIs at 3 T were reviewed, and a control group of studies for the same clinical indication and equivalent gestational age were selected for comparison. Two of the four radiologists preferred 3-T image quality of the brain with slight agreement among the four reviewers (k=0.19, P=0.01). Three of the four radiologists had no preference for 1.5 T vs. 3 T in the majority of cases in evaluating the chest and abdomen. In the overall assessment, 3 T was preferred in less than half of cases by all four radiologists (k=0.07, P=0.26). In the evaluation of standing wave, moire fringe and magnetic susceptibility artifacts, 3 T was not preferred in the majority of studies by all four radiologists. Total exam time was significantly longer in the 3-T fetal MRIs (75.0±15.1 min) compared to the 1.5-T fetal MRIs (55.5±13.3 min, P<0.001).

conclusionWhile 3 T is a feasible alternative to 1.5 T for fetal MRI, the increased artifacts and longer exam times observed at 3 T without clear improvement in overall image quality make 1.5 T preferable for fetal MRI in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

ArtifactsMagnetic Resonance ImagingBrainFetusHumansRetrospective Studies3 TBodyBrainExam timeFetusImage qualityMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID34009407
OpenAlexW3163901753

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.