ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2023
High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging compared with conventional diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with regard to image quality and assessment of breast cancer morphology
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multidimensional evaluation of 3.0T HR-MRI, ultrasound imaging, and GATA3 protein expression in breast cancer, and their prognostic analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Advances in Risk Management and Screening for Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer: The Role of MR Imaging and Personalised Approaches.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Review
- Effect of contrast agent on T2-weighted fat-suppressed imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging in the diagnosis of breast tumors.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the image quality and tumor morphology depiction ability of high resolution (HR) diffusion- weighted imaging (f-DWI) in comparison to conventional DWI (c-DWI) and dynamic contrast- enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in the primary breast cancer setting.
methodsThe f-DWI, c-DWI, and DCE-MRIs of 160 malignant breast masses were evaluated retrospectively by two independent radiologists. Data on image quality [sharpness, distortion, and perceived signalto- noise ratio (SNR)], apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value, lesion size, and tumor morphology (shape, margin, and internal pattern) obtained on f-DWI, c-DWI, and DCE-MRI were compared. Consistency between the readers and imaging methods for morphological parameters was analyzed.
resultsThe ADC values measured on f-DWI were significantly lower than those measured on c-DWI for both readers (
conclusionThe results demonstrated that f-DWI produces higher-quality images than c-DWI, enabling the morphological features to be identified in similar detail to that offered by HR DCE-MRI. Accordingly, f-DWI, as a method that highly correlates with DCE in determining the morphological characteristics of breast cancers, seems to have potential in the evaluation of breast tumors in patients for whom the use of contrast media is contraindicated.
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.