ArticleHeliyon2024
An applicability study of rapid artificial intelligence-assisted compressed sensing (ACS) in anal fistula magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in anal fistula: mapping evidence to IDEAL stages.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Review
- Free-breathing pediatric cardiac dark-blood imaging with reverse double inversion-recovery and single-shot deep learning reconstruction.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of complex anal fistula.Annals of coloproctology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the applicability of artificial intelligence-assisted compressed sensing (ACS) to anal fistula magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods: 51 patients were included in this study and underwent T2-weighted sequence of MRI examinations both with ACS and without ACS technology in a 3.0 T MR scanner. Subjective image quality scores, and objective image quality-related metrics including scanning time, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were evaluated and statistically compared between the images collected with and without ACS. Results: No significant difference in the subjective image quality of lesion conspicuity was observed between the two groups. However, ACS MRI decreased the acquisition time with regard to control group (74.00 s vs. 156.00 s). Besides, SNR of perianal and muscle in the ACS group was significantly higher than that of the control group (164.07 ± 33.35 vs 130.81 ± 29.10, p < 0.001; 109.87 ± 22.01 vs 87.61 ± 17.95, p < 0.001; respectively). The CNR was significantly higher in the ACS group than in the control group (54.02 ± 23.98 vs 43.20 ± 21.00; p < 0.001). Moreover, the accuracy rate of the ACS groups in evaluating the direction and internal opening of the fistula was 88.89 %, exactly the same as that of the control group. Conclusion: We demonstrated the applicability of using ACS to accelerate MR of anal fistulas with improved SNR and CNR. Meanwhile, the accuracy rates of the ACS group and the control were equivalent in evaluating the direction and internal opening of the fistula, based on the results of surgical exploration.
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.