ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021
Fluid-based augmentation of magnetic resonance visualization of interventional devices.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fluid-based augmentation of magnetic resonance visualization of interventional devices.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the transient artifact augmentation of microtubes in magnetic resonance imaging by fluid injection.
methodsTwenty-one fluorinated ethylene propylene catheters (inner diameter 760 μm) were filled with three different contrast media at various concentrations (Ferucarbotran, Resovist®, Bayer Schering Pharma; Manganese dichloride, MnCl2, Sigma-Aldrich; Gadobutrol, Gadovist®, Bayer Schering Pharma). Artifact appearance was determined in an ex vivo phantom at 1.5 T using three different sequences: T1-weighted three-dimensional volume interpolated breath-hold examination, T2-weighted turbo spin echo, and T1-weighted fast low angle shot. Catheter angulation to the main magnetic field (B0) was varied. Influence of parameters on artifact diameters was assessed with a multiple linear regression similar to an analysis of variance.
resultsArtifact diameter was significantly influenced by the contrast agent (p < 0.001), concentration of the contrast agent (p < 0.001), angulation of the phantom to B0 with the largest artifact at 90° (p < 0.001), and encoding direction with a larger diameter in phase encoding direction (PED, p < 0.001). Mean artifact diameters at 90° angulation to B0 in PED were 18.5 ± 5.4 mm in 0.5 mmol/ml Ferucarbotran, 8.7 ± 2.5 mm in 1 mmol/ml Gadobutrol, and 11.6 ± 4.6 mm in 5 mmol/ml MnCl
conclusionsFluid-based contrast agents might be applied to interventional devices and thus temporarily augment the artifact ensuring both visibility and safe navigation.
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.