ArticleCancers2024
Speeding Up and Improving Image Quality in Glioblastoma MRI Protocol by Deep Learning Image Reconstruction.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-accelerated 3D flair for white matter lesion detection in multiple sclerosis: a feasibility study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Enhancing 7T MRI for deep brain stimulation with deep-learning based image reconstruction and dynamic parallel transmission.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2026Article
- Multidisciplinary, Clinical Assessment of Accelerated Deep-Learning MRI Protocols at 1.5 T and 3 T After Intracranial Tumor Surgery and Their Influence on Residual Tumor Perception.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Can diffusion-based generated magnetic resonance images predict glioma methylation accurately?Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary quantitative and qualitative assessment of IDH-mutant gliomas with full diagnostic deep learning image reconstruction.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A fully diagnostic MRI glioma protocol is key to monitoring therapy assessment but is time-consuming and especially challenging in critically ill and uncooperative patients. Artificial intelligence demonstrated promise in reducing scan time and improving image quality simultaneously. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance, the impact on acquisition acceleration, and the image quality of a deep learning optimized glioma protocol of the brain. Thirty-three patients with histologically confirmed glioblastoma underwent standardized brain tumor imaging according to the glioma consensus recommendations on a 3-Tesla MRI scanner. Conventional and deep learning-reconstructed (DLR) fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, and T2- and T1-weighted contrast-enhanced Turbo spin echo images with an improved in-plane resolution, i.e., super-resolution, were acquired. Two experienced neuroradiologists independently evaluated the image datasets for subjective image quality, diagnostic confidence, tumor conspicuity, noise levels, artifacts, and sharpness. In addition, the tumor volume was measured in the image datasets according to Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2.0, as well as compared between both imaging techniques, and various clinical-pathological parameters were determined. The average time saving of DLR sequences was 30% per MRI sequence. Simultaneously, DLR sequences showed superior overall image quality (all
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.