ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2024
Interventional device tracking under MRI via alternating current controlled inhomogeneities.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 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-T MRI in vitro characterisation of a SPION-polymer balloon catheter: a proof-of-concept study.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Flexible, multimodal, electrical-sensing-optical-transmission μfiber-sensors via an on-fiber printed electronics strategy.National science review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo introduce alternating current-controlled, conductive ink-printed marker that could be implemented with both custom and commercial interventional devices for device tracking under MRI using gradient echo, balanced SSFP, and turbo spin-echo sequences.
methodsTracking markers were designed as solenoid coils and printed on heat shrink tubes using conductive ink. These markers were then placed on three MR-compatible test samples that are typically challenging to visualize during MRI scans. MRI visibility of markers was tested by applying alternating and direct current to the markers, and the effects of applied current parameters (amplitude, frequency) on marker artifacts were tested for three sequences (gradient echo, turbo spin echo, and balanced SSFP) in a gel phantom, using 0.55T and 1.5T MRI scanners. Furthermore, an MR-compatible current supply circuit was designed, and the performance of the current-controlled markers was tested in one postmortem animal experiment using the current supply circuit.
resultsDirection and parameters of the applied current were determined to provide the highest conspicuity for all three sequences. Marker artifact size was controlled by adjusting the current amplitude, successfully. Visibility of a custom-designed, 20-gauge nitinol needle was increased in both in vitro and postmortem animal experiments using the current supply circuit.
conclusionCurrent-controlled conductive ink-printed markers can be placed on custom or commercial MR-compatible interventional tools and can provide an easy and effective solution to device tracking under MRI for three sequences by adjusting the applied current parameters with respect to pulse sequence parameters using the current supply circuit.
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.