ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Cervical artery tortuosity-a reliable semi-automated magnetic resonance-based method.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carotid artery segmentation in computed tomography angiography (CTA) using multi-scale deep supervision with Swin-UNet and advanced data augmentation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Assessments of subclinical connective tissue disorders depend on complex approaches, emphasizing the need for more accessible methods applicable to clinical routine. Therefore, we aimed to establish a reliable approach assessing cervical vessel tortuosity, which is known to be associated with such disorders. Methods: Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) images of ReSect study participants [single-center prospective cohort of spontaneous cervical artery dissection (sCeAD) patients] were used. Each patient underwent the same magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol. The segmentation procedure was done using MATrix LABoratory 9.4 [up-sampling of raw MRA images, distance metric (DM) calculation], ITK-SNAP [region of interest (ROI) determination, vessel segmentation] and Vascular Modelling ToolKit (centerline determination). To assess inter-user variability and validity, we (I) had two blinded independent users segment all arteries and we (II) compared the results of our method to visual appraisal of vessel tortuosity done by two blinded expert neuro-radiologists. Results: A total of 526 extracranial cervical arteries were available for analysis. The inter-user variability of our method users was below 0.5% throughout. Overall, our method outperformed the visual tortuosity appraisal, as the visual grading underestimated the DM in 38.8% subjects when tasked to assess overall cervical artery tortuosity (both vertebral and internal carotid arteries) and in 16.6% and 33.3% respectively if tasked to grade anterior or posterior circulation separately. Conclusions: We present a reliable method to assess cervical artery tortuosity derived from MRA images applicable in clinical routine and future research investigating the potential correlation of sCeAD and connective tissue disorder.
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.