ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022
Comparison of compressed sensing-sensitivity encoding (CS-SENSE) accelerated 3D T2W TSE sequence versus conventional 3D and 2D T2W TSE sequences in rectal cancer: a prospective study.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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.
- Deep learning reconstruction enables accelerated T2-weighted MRI for rectal cancer staging: a prospective study of diagnostic consistency across NEX value reduction.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Accelerated diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate employing echo planar imaging with compressed SENSE based reconstruction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic value of compressed sensing-sensitivity encoding (CS-SENSE) accelerated 3-dimensional (3D) T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (T2W TSE) sequence in patients with rectal cancer compared with conventional 3D and 2-dimensional (2D) sequences.
methodsA total of 54 patients who underwent the above three sequences were enrolled. Two radiologists independently reviewed the image quality using an ordinal 5-point Likert scale. The quantitative measurement was performed to calculate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). The diagnostic value was assessed using TN staging, extramural vascular invasion and mesorectal fascia status. Friedman and McNemar's tests were applied for comparative analysis.
resultsForty-two patients were successfully included. Compared with 3D and 2D sequences, the CS-SENSE 3D sequence speeded up by 39% and 23%, respectively. The edge sharpness of CS-SENSE 3D images was similar to that of 3D and 2D images. The noise of CS-SENSE 3D images was comparable to that of 3D images but higher than that of 2D images. The SNR
conclusionsCS-SENSE 3D T2 sequence provided comparable diagnostic performance, with substantially reduced imaging time and no significant sacrifices in image quality. This technique may serve as a reliable tool for evaluating rectal cancer.
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.