ArticlePloS one2021
High resolution flat-panel CT arthrography vs. MR arthrography of artificially created osteochondral defects in ex vivo upper ankle joints.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultra-High-Resolution Photon-Counting Detector CT Arthrography of the Ankle: A Feasibility Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHigh resolution flat-panel computed tomography arthrography (FPCT-A) and magnetic resonance arthrography (MR-A) are well suited to evaluate osteochondral lesions. The current study compares the performance of FPCT-A versus MR-A in an experimental setting.
methodsFourteen cadaveric ankles were prepared with artificial osteochondral defects of various sizes in four separate talar locations. After intra-articular contrast injection, FPCT-A and 3-T MR-A were acquired. Each defect was then filled with synthetic pallets. The resulting cast was used as reference. Two independent radiologists measured the dimensions of all defects with FPCT-A and MR-A. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. Data were compared using t-tests and Bland-Altman plots.
resultsThe correlation for FPCT-A and cast was higher compared to MR-A and cast (ICC 0.876 vs. 0.799 for surface [length x width]; ICC 0.887 vs. 0.866 for depth, p<0.001). Mean differences between FPCT-A and cast measurements were -1.1 mm for length (p<0.001), -0.7 mm for width (p<0.001) and -0.4 mm for depth (p = 0.023). By MR-A, there were no significant differences for length and width compared to cast (p>0.05). Depth measurements were significantly smaller by MR-A (mean difference -1.1 mm, p<0.001). There was no bias between the different modalities.
conclusionsEx vivo FPCT-A and MR-A both deliver high diagnostic accuracy for the evaluation of osteochondral defects. FPCT-A was slightly more accurate than MR-A, which was most significant when measuring lesion depth.
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.