ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Accuracy of Inflow Inversion Recovery (IFIR) for Upper Abdominal Arteries Evaluation: Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced MR and CTA.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Subtractive Arterial Spin Labeling-Based (NSASL) Renal Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA): Development and Clinical Feasibility Evaluation.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
- Development of a Novel Scoring Model to Estimate the Severity Grade of Mesenteric Artery Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inflow-sensitive inversion recovery (IFIR) is a recently introduced technique to perform unenhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). The purpose of our study is to determine the accuracy of IFIR-MRA in the evaluation of upper abdominal arteries, compared to standard MRA and computed tomography angiography (CTA). Materials and Methods: Seventy patients undergoing upper abdomen Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in different clinical settings were enrolled. The MRI protocol included an IFIR-MRA sequence that was intra-individually compared by using a qualitative 4-point scale in the same patients who underwent concomitant or close MRA (n = 65) and/or CTA (n = 44). Celiac trunk (CA), common-proper-left-right hepatic artery (C-P-L-R-HA), left gastric artery (LGA), gastroduodenal artery (GDA), splenic artery (SA), renal arteries (RA) and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) were assessed. Results: IFIR-MRA images were better rated in comparison with MRA. Particularly, all arteries obtained a statistically significant higher qualitative rating value (all p < 0.05). IFIR-MRA and MRA exhibited acceptable intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) values for CA, C-L-R-HA, and SMA (ICC 0.507, 0.591, 0.615, 0.570, 0.525). IFIR-MRA and CTA showed significant correlations in C-P-L-R-HA (τ = 0.362, 0.261, 0.308, 0.307, respectively; p < 0.05), and in RA (τ = 0.279, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Compared to MRA, IFIR-MRA demonstrated a higher image quality in the majority of upper abdomen arterial vessels assessment. LHA and RHA branches could be better visualized with IFIR sequences, when visualizable. Based on these findings, we suggest to routinely integrate IFIR sequences in upper abdomen MRI studies.
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.