ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2022
Magnetic resonance image compilation sequence to quantitatively detect active sacroiliitis with axial spondyloarthritis.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative evaluation of synthetic MRI for assessing disease activity in thyroid eye disease.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Clinical Application of MAGiC Method in Distinguishing Between Pituitary Adenoma and Rathke's Cleft Cyst.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease using multiparametric MRI with the multiplex sequence.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Synthetic MRI in the detection and quantitative evaluation of sacroiliac joint lesions in axial spondyloarthritis.Frontiers in immunology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To evaluate the diagnostic value of quantitative parameters [T1, T2, and proton density (PD) value] generated from magnetic resonance image compilation (MAGiC) sequence for active sacroiliitis in the patients with axial spondyloarthritis (ax-SpA). Methods: A total of 90 consecutive ax-SpA patients were recruited and divided into an active group (n=48) and inactive group (n=42) based on the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium Canada (SPARCC) score in this prospective study. In addition, 47 healthy volunteers were recruited as the control group. All participants underwent magnetic resonance (MR) scanning (including MAGiC sequence and T2 mapping sequence) to obtain the T1 value, T2 value, PD value of MAGiC sequence (MAGiC T1 value, T2 value, PD value), and the T2 value of T2 mapping sequence (T2 map T2 value). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess the inter‑ and intra‑observer agreement. The correlation between the MAGiC T2 value and the T2 map T2 value was analyzed using Spearman's Rho. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed for all parameters. Results: For the active group, inactive group, and control group, the MAGiC T1 value, T2 value, PD value, and T2 map T2 value were (1,700.91±725.40, 546.58±59.49, 640.25±95.79 ms), (129.37±23.85, 117.16±20.37, 90.52±12.05 ms), (76.47±15.92, 82.69±9.51, 75.51±9.17 pu), and (96.75±16.06, 87.96±9.27, 82.03±10.17 ms), respectively. The difference of the MAGiC T1 value and the MAGiC T2 value in the three groups was statistically significant (P<0.05). The MAGiC PD value was only statistically significant between inactive and control groups (P=0.001). When comparing the ROC curves of quantitative values among the three groups, MAGiC T1 value showed higher diagnostic efficacy than MAGiC T2 value between the active and inactive groups (MAGiC T1 Conclusions: A significant difference was detected between the MAGiC T1 and T2 values among the three groups, while MAGiC PD value had limited diagnostic value. MAGiC T1 value was better at differentiating the active group and inactive group than MAGiC T2 value. MAGiC T2 value was better at differentiating the active group and control group, the inactive group and control group than T2 map T2 value.
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.