ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2022
Dorsal Root Ganglion Volumetry by MR Gangliography.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative MRI of dorsal root ganglion alterations in neurofibromatosis type 1 patients with or without pain.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- MRI T2 Mapping of Dorsal Root Ganglia Reveals Increased T2 Relaxation Time in Classical Fabry Disease.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Article
- Dorsal root ganglion magnetic resonance imaging biomarker correlations with pain in Fabry disease.Brain communications · 2024Article
- Dorsal Root Ganglia Volume-Normative Values, Correlation with Demographic Determinants and Reliability of Three Different Methods of Volumetry.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeDorsal root ganglion MR imaging (MR gangliography) is increasingly gaining clinical-scientific relevance. However, dorsal root ganglion morphometry by MR imaging is typically performed under the assumption of ellipsoid geometry, which remains to be validated. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty-four healthy volunteers (37 [57.8%] men; mean age, 31.5 [SD, 8.3] years) underwent MR gangliography of the bilateral L4-S2 levels (3D-T2WI TSE spectral attenuated inversion recovery-sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts by using different flip angle evolution, isotropic voxels = 1.1 mm³, TE = 301 ms). Ground truth dorsal root ganglion volumes were bilaterally determined for 96 dorsal root ganglia (derivation cohort) by expert manual 3D segmentation by 3 independent raters. These ground truth dorsal root ganglion volumes were then compared with geometric ellipsoid dorsal root ganglion approximations as commonly practiced for dorsal root ganglion morphometry. On the basis of the deviations from ellipsoid geometry, improved volume estimation could be derived and was finally applied to a large human validation cohort (510 dorsal root ganglia).
resultsCommonly used equations of ellipsoid geometry underestimate true dorsal root ganglion volume by large degrees (factor = 0.42-0.63). Ground truth segmentation enabled substantially optimizing dorsal root ganglion geometric approximation using its principal axes lengths by deriving the dorsal root ganglion volume term of [Formula: see text]. Using this optimization, the mean volumes of 510 lumbosacral healthy dorsal root ganglia were as follows: L4: 211.3 (SD, 52.5) mm³, L5: 290.7 (SD, 90.9) mm³, S1: 384.2 (SD, 145.0) mm³, and S2: 192.4 (SD, 52.6) mm³. Dorsal root ganglion volume increased from L4 to S1 and decreased from S1 to S2 (
conclusionsDorsal root ganglion volumetry by measuring its principal geometric axes on MR gangliography can be substantially optimized. By means of this optimization, dorsal root ganglion volume distribution was estimated in a large healthy cohort for the clinically most relevant lumbosacral levels, L4-S2.
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.