Observational studyContrast media & molecular imaging2021
The Pattern of Use, Effectiveness, and Safety of Gadoteric Acid (Clariscan) in Patients Undergoing Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study.
Observational study in Contrast media & molecular imaging, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Contrast-enhanced MR (CE-MR) imaging is often required to improve lesion detection and characterization and to increase diagnostic confidence. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness, as well as the use pattern, of the macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent Clariscan in real-world clinical practice in Korea. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study of patients undergoing CE-MR as part of routine clinical care at 6 university hospitals in Korea. Effectiveness was evaluated by determining diagnostic confidence and image quality; safety evaluation included the adverse event (AE) expression rate. Subgroup analyses were conducted by body regions of diagnosis (musculoskeletal, nervous system, others) and in pediatric patients (aged ≤7 years). Results: From October 2019 to September 2020, 1,376 subjects were included in the study. The mean volume of Clariscan used was 0.26 mL/kg (0.13 mmol/kg). In the overall study population and in each subgroup, diagnostic confidence increased after contrast enhancement with Clariscan. Overall, image quality was excellent in 72.5% of subjects and good-to-adequate in 27.2%. Clariscan was well tolerated (14 AEs occurred in 10 subjects); all AEs were of mild severity. Subgroup analyses showed that the mean dose of Clariscan used was ≥0.1 mmol/kg for nervous system-related diagnoses (e.g., brain) and ≤0.1 mmol/kg for musculoskeletal and pediatric-related diagnoses. All musculoskeletal and pediatric examinations were provided with a smaller package of 5 mL Clariscan. By body region of MR examination, the most common region was the nervous system in 69.0%, musculoskeletal system in 13.6%, and reproductive system in 4.9%. Conclusions: This study confirmed the use pattern of Clariscan and its excellent effectiveness and safety in the real-world clinical environment in Korea. The small-dose package indicated the possibility of increasing the convenience and efficiency of drug use.
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.