ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2023
Arterial spin labeling using spatio-temporal encoding readout for robust perfusion imaging in inhomogenous magnetic fields.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent advances in arterial spin labeling MRI for imaging brain tumors.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Arterial spin labeling using spatio-temporal encoding readout for robust perfusion imaging in inhomogenous magnetic fields.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the feasibility of spatio-temporal encoding (SPEN) readout for pseudo-continuous ASL (pCASL) in brain, and its robustness to susceptibility artifacts as introduced by aneurysm clips.
methodsA 2D self-refocused T
resultsThe clip-induced artifact with SPEN decreased with increase in Q, and was smaller compared to SE-EPI and GE-EPI in vivo. tSNR decreased with Q and the tSNR of GE-EPI and SE-EPI corresponded to SPEN with a Q-value of approximately ˜85 and ˜108, respectively. In addition, SPEN perfusion images showed a higher tSNR (p < 0.05) for TR = 4000 ms compared to TR = 2100 ms, while SE-EPI did not. tSNR remained relatively stable when the time between SPEN-excitation and start of the next labeling-module was more than ˜1000 ms.
conclusionFeasibility of combining SPEN with pCASL imaging was demonstrated, enabling cerebral perfusion measurements with a higher robustness to field inhomogeneity (Q > 75) compared to SE-EPI and GE-EPI. However, the SPEN chirp-pulse saturates incoming blood, thereby reducing pCASL labeling efficiency of the next acquisition for short TRs. Future developments are needed to enable 3D scanning.
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.