ArticleSkeletal radiology2021
Diagnostic contribution of contrast-enhanced 3D MR imaging of peripheral nerve pathology.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of different acceleration factors of artificial intelligence-compressed sensing for brachial plexus MRI imaging: scanning time and image quality.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Advanced Imaging of the Peripheral Nerves, From theAJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2024Review
- Visualization of the Extracranial Branches of the Trigeminal Nerve Using Improved Motion-Sensitized Driven Equilibrium-Prepared 3D Inversion Recovery TSE Sequence.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Multimodality imaging review of ulnar nerve pathologies.The neuroradiology journal · 2024Article
- MRI of patellar stabilizers: Anatomic visibility, inter-reader reliability, and intra-reader reproducibility of primary and secondary ligament anatomy.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Society of skeletal radiology position paper - recommendations for contrast use in musculoskeletal MRI: when is non-contrast imaging enough?Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Improved visualization of median, ulnar nerves, and small branches in the wrist and palm using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance neurography.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2024Article
- Diagnostic performance of deep learning-based reconstruction algorithm in 3D MR neurography.Skeletal radiology · 2023Article
- Role of MR Neurography for Evaluation of the Lumbosacral Plexus: A Scoping Review.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic contribution of contrast-enhanced 3D STIR (ce3D-SS) high-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of peripheral nerve pathology relative to conventional 2D sequences. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this IRB-approved retrospective study, two radiologists reviewed 60 MR neurography studies with nerve pathology findings. The diagnostic contribution of ce3D-SS imaging was scored on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = no additional information, 2 = supports interpretation, 3 = moderate additional information, and 4 = diagnosis not possible without ce3D-SS). Image quality, nerve visualization, and detection of nerve pathology were also assessed for both standard 2D neurography and ce3D-SS sequences utilizing a 3-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics are reported.
resultsThe diagnostic contribution score for ce3D-SS imaging was 2.25 for the brachial plexus, 1.50 for extremities, and 1.75 for the lumbosacral plexus. For brachial plexus, the mean consensus scores for image quality, nerve visualization, and detection of nerve pathology were 2.55, 2.5, and 2.55 for 2D and 2.35, 2.45, and 2.45 for 3D. For extremities, the mean consensus scores for image quality, nerve visualization, and detection of nerve pathology were 2.60, 2.80, and 2.70 for 2D and 1.8, 2.20, and 2.10 for 3D. For lumbosacral plexus, the mean consensus scores for image quality, nerve visualization, and detection of nerve pathology were 2.45, 2.75, and 2.65 for 2D and 2.0, 2.45, and 2.25 for 3D.
conclusionOverall, our study supports the potential application of ce3D-SS imaging for MRN of the brachial plexus but suggests that 2D MRN protocols are sufficient for MRN of the extremities and lumbosacral plexus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34052869What 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.