Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38671973›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2024

Evaluating the Efficacy of Perfusion MRI and Conventional MRI in Distinguishing Recurrent Cerebral Metastasis from Brain Radiation Necrosis.

Anders Schack, Jan Saip Aunan-Diop, Frederik A Gerhardt, Christian Bonde Pedersen, Bo Halle, Mikkel S Kofoed, Ljubo Markovic, Martin Wirenfeldt, Frantz Rom Poulsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anders SchackDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-9280-0384
Jan Saip Aunan-DiopDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.
Frederik A GerhardtDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0009-0009-5774-3298
Christian Bonde PedersenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.
Bo HalleDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.
Mikkel S KofoedDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6819-4345
Ljubo MarkovicDepartment of Radiology, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.
Martin WirenfeldtDepartment of Pathology, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, DK-6000 Esbjerg, Denmark.
Frantz Rom PoulsenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-5715-6901
University of Southern Denmark · DKOdense University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Differentiating recurrent cerebral metastasis (CM) from brain radiation necrosis (BRN) is pivotal for guiding appropriate treatment and prognostication. Despite advances in imaging techniques, however, accurately distinguishing these conditions non-invasively is still challenging. This single-center retrospective study reviewed 32 cases (28 patients) with confirmed cerebral metastases who underwent surgical excision of lesions initially diagnosed by MRI and/or MR perfusion scans from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2020. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by comparing imaging findings with postoperative histopathology. Conventional MRI accurately identified recurrent CM in 75% of cases. MR perfusion scans showed significantly higher mean maximum relative cerebral blood volume (max. rCBV) in metastasis cases, indicating its potential as a discriminative biomarker. No single imaging modality could definitively distinguish CM from BRN. Survival analysis revealed gender as the only significant factor affecting overall survival, with no significant survival difference observed between patients with CM and BRN after controlling for confounding factors. This study underscores the limitations of both conventional MRI and MR perfusion scans in differentiating recurrent CM from BRN. Histopathological examination remains essential for accurate diagnosis. Further research is needed to improve the reliability of non-invasive imaging and to guide the management of patients with these post-radiation events.

Indexed as

cerebral metastasisdiagnostic reliabilitymagnetic resonance imagingradiation necrosisradiation therapy

Identifiers

PMID38671973
PMCPMC11048647
OpenAlexW4393235401

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.