ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Differentiation of bone metastases from benign red marrow depositions of the spine: the role of fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging compared to fat fraction map.
Article in European radiology, 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.
- Exploring Fat Fraction and Vertebral Bone Quality Score in Lumbar Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Cross-Sectional Study on Associations and Clinical Implication.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Does the presence of macroscopic intralesional fat exclude malignancy? An analysis of 613 histologically proven malignant bone lesions.European radiology · 2024Article
- Article
- [Imaging Findings of Spinal Metastases with Differential Diagnosis: Focusing on Solitary Spinal Lesion in Older Patients].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo differentiate bone metastases (BMs) from benign red marrow depositions (BRMs) of the spine using quantitative parameters derived from fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging (T2 FS) and fat fraction (FF) map
methodsOne hundred eleven lesions, divided into 62 BMs and 49 BRMs according to MR images and either bone scan or PET-CT, were assessed with T2 FS and FF map. Two radiologists independently measured quantitative parameters from the ROIs in the lesions, including fat-suppressed (FS) T2 ratio (ratio of lesion FS T2 signal intensity [SI] to normal marrow FS T2 SI), FF, and FF ratio (ratio of lesion FF to normal marrow FF). The mean values of these parameters were compared between the two groups. To evaluate the diagnostic utilities of individual (FS T2 ratio, FF, and FF ratio) and combined parameters, ROC curves were analyzed. For the ROC curves among the individual parameters and their combinations, AUCs were compared.
resultsThe FS T2 ratio of BMs was significantly higher than that of BRMs (2.638 vs. 1.155 [p < 0.001]). The FF and FF ratio of BMs were significantly lower than those of BRMs (FF, 3.554% vs. 20.038% [p < 0.001]; FF ratio, 0.072 vs. 0.364 [p < 0.001]). The ROC AUCs of individual and combined parameters ranged from 0.941 to 0.980. The AUCs of all individual parameters and their combinations did not demonstrate statistically significant differences.
conclusionThe FS T2 ratio, FF, and FF ratio can be useful in differentiating BMs from BRMs with or without any combination of the parameters. KEY POINTS: • Quantitative parameters derived from fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging and fat fraction map could be used to differentiate bone metastases from benign red marrow depositions with or without any combination of the parameters. • Quantitative parameters of fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging provide diagnostic performance similar to those of fat fraction map in differentiating bone metastases from benign red marrow depositions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35798881What 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.