Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38381197›Full record

ReviewSkeletal radiology2024

Modern low-field MRI.

Tobias Pogarell, Rafael Heiss, Rolf Janka, Armin M Nagel, Michael Uder, Frank W Roemer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Skeletal radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Tobias PogarellDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. tobias.pogarell@uk-erlangen.de.
Rafael HeissDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Rolf JankaDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Armin M NagelDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Michael UderDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Frank W RoemerDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This narrative review explores recent advancements and applications of modern low-field (≤ 1 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in musculoskeletal radiology. Historically, high-field MRI systems (1.5 T and 3 T) have been the standard in clinical practice due to superior image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio. However, recent technological advancements in low-field MRI offer promising avenues for musculoskeletal imaging. General principles of low-field MRI systems are being introduced, highlighting their strengths and limitations compared to high-field counterparts. Emphasis is placed on advancements in hardware design, including novel magnet configurations, gradient systems, and radiofrequency coils, which have improved image quality and reduced susceptibility artifacts particularly in musculoskeletal imaging. Different clinical applications of modern low-field MRI in musculoskeletal radiology are being discussed. The diagnostic performance of low-field MRI in diagnosing various musculoskeletal pathologies, such as ligament and tendon injuries, osteoarthritis, and cartilage lesions, is being presented. Moreover, the discussion encompasses the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of low-field MRI systems, making them viable options for imaging centers with limited resources or specific patient populations. From a scientific standpoint, the amount of available data regarding musculoskeletal imaging at low-field strengths is limited and often several decades old. This review will give an insight to the existing literature and summarize our own experiences with a modern low-field MRI system over the last 3 years. In conclusion, the narrative review highlights the potential clinical utility, challenges, and future directions of modern low-field MRI, offering valuable insights for radiologists and healthcare professionals seeking to leverage these advancements in their practice.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingMusculoskeletal DiseasesEquipment DesignHumansMusculoskeletal SystemSignal-To-Noise Ratio0.55 TeslaField strengthJointsKneeLow-fieldMRIMusculoskeletal radiology

Identifiers

PMID38381197
PMCPMC11303481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.