ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2024
Comparing 2-dimensional versus 3-dimensional MR myelography for cerebrospinal fluid leak detection.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 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.
- Inner ear high signal on non‑contrast 3D FLAIR imaging in patients with cerebrospinal fluid leaks: Association with dural/subdural changes and with audiovestibular symptoms.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Article
- "Flow Void Sign": Flow Artifact on T2-Weighted MRI Can Be an Indicator of Dural Defect Location in Ventral Type 1 Spinal CSF Leaks.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We compared cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak conspicuity and image quality as visualized using 3D versus 2D magnetic resonance (MR) myelography in patients with spinal CSF leaks. Methods: Eighteen patients underwent spinal MR imaging at 3 Tesla. Three board-certified radiologists independently evaluated CSF leak conspicuity and image quality on a 4-point scale; the latter assessed by scoring fat suppression, venous visualization, and severity of CSF flow artifacts. Additionally, the evaluators ranked the overall performances of 2D versus 3D MR myelography upon completing side-by-side comparisons of CSF leak conspicuity. Inter-reader agreement was determined using the Gwet's AC1. Results: The quality of 3D MR myelography images was significantly better than that of 2D MR myelography with respect to CSF leak conspicuity (mean scores: 3.3 vs. 1.9, Conclusion: CSF leaks are more conspicuous when using 3D MR myelography than when using its 2D counterpart; therefore, the former is more reliable for identifying such leaks.
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.