Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34790309›Full record

ReviewThe Indian journal of radiology & imaging2021

The Use of Gadolinium in Musculoskeletal MRI-Time to Rethink?

Arwa Elawad, Amit Shah, Mark Davies, Rajesh Botchu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Indian journal of radiology & imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Gadolinium injected concurrently with anesthetic can result in false-negative diagnostic intra-articular hip injections.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023
    Article
  3. Primary Osseous Malignancies of the Spine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
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

4 authors.

Arwa ElawadDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Amit ShahDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Mark DaviesDepartment of Radiology, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Rajesh BotchuDepartment of Radiology, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging has continued to evolve over the recent decades, in part, due to the evolution of gadolinium-based contrast agents and their use. These were initially thought to have a relatively low-risk profile. However, there is mounting evidence that trace amounts of gadolinium are retained within the body. To ascertain the current use of gadolinium in medical practice, we performed a survey of musculoskeletal radiologists, within the United Kingdom, Europe and India. The survey demonstrated varied practices amongst all radiologists with relatively indiscriminate use of gadolinium. In this review, we discuss the current evidence for and against the use of gadolinium in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging.

Indexed as

brain depositioncontrastgadoliniummagnetic resonance imagingmusculoskeletal

Identifiers

PMID34790309
PMCPMC8590572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.