ArticleEuropean radiology2024
Comparison between ZOOMit DWI and conventional DWI in the assessment of foot and ankle infection: a prospective study.
Article in European radiology, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Musculoskeletal System: Evolving Role in Modern Imaging Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study aimed to compare ZOOMit diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) MRI with conventional DWI MRI for visualizing small bones in the foot, soft tissue abscesses, and osteomyelitis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe cohort consisted of a consecutive series of patients with potential foot and ankle infections referred for MR imaging. Patients were imaged using both conventional and ZOOMit DWI in the same setting. Blinded reads were then conducted in separate settings and independent of known clinical diagnosis by two expert radiologists. The results from the reads were compared statistically using paired t-tests and with biopsy specimen analysis, both anatomopathological and microbiological.
resultsThere was improvement in fat suppression using ZOOMit sequence compared to conventional DWI (p = .001) with no significant difference in motion artifacts (p = .278). ZOOMit had a higher rate of concordance with pathology findings for osteomyelitis (72%, 31/43 cases) compared with conventional DWI (60%, 26/43 cases). ZOOMit also identified 46 additional small bones of the foot and ankle (405/596, 68.0%) than conventional DWI (359/596, 60.2%). Conventional DWI however exhibited a more negative contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) than ZOOMit (p = 0.001).
conclusionZOOMit DWI improves distal extremity proton diffusion assessment and helps visualize more bones in the foot, with less image distortion and improved fat saturation at the expense of reduced CNR. This makes it a viable option for assessing lower extremity infections. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study highlights the novel utilization of ZOOMit diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for the assessment of lower extremity lesions compared to conventional DWI. KEY POINTS: • Distal extremity diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is often limited. • ZOOMit DWI displayed improved fat suppression with less motion artifacts and better visualization of the lower extremity bones than conventional DWI. • ZOOMit shows decreased contrast-to-noise ratio than conventional DWI.
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.