ArticleCureus2024
Evaluating the Efficacy of Volume Isotropic Turbo Spin Echo Acquisition Versus T2-Weighted Turbo Spin Echo Imaging in the Diagnosis of Nerve Root and Perineuronal Pathologies in Spinal Disorders.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background While two-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE) sequences offer better through-plane resolution than three-dimensional (3D) isotropic TSE sequences images, with a narrower thickness of the slice, 3D isotropic TSE sequences are known to have a weaker in-plane resolution as well as blurring of the image. These elements may make it more difficult to distinguish between nearby structures that may affect nerve roots and small nerve roots during spinal imaging. This study aimed to analyze the accuracy of T2 TSE sequence and volumetric isotropic TSE acquisition in determining the indentation of nerve roots and perineural diseases such as nerve sheath tumors and Tarlov cysts. Methods Fifty patients who attended the Department of Radiodiagnosis for magnetic resonance (MR) spine participated in this prospective study. Routine MR lumbosacral (LS) spine sequences, such as survey, coronal T2 short-tau inversion recovery (STIR), sagittal T2 TSE, sagittal T1 TSE, and axial T2 TSE, were carried out after a localizer was acquired. More sequences from volume isotropic turbo spin echo acquisition (VISTA) were acquired. For both 2D and 3D sequences, the visibility ratings for perineural cysts, spinal canal stenosis, and nerve root indentation were evaluated. Visibility ratings ranged from zero to four. Results In the cases of perineural cyst, spinal canal stenosis, and nerve root impingement, the mean difference between the VISTA and T2 TSE visibility scores was 0.04, 0.54, and 0.56, respectively. The VISTA and T2 TS had standard deviation differences of 0.006, 0.026, and 0.06, respectively. The "t" values for nerve root impingement, spinal canal stenosis, and perineural cysts were, in order, 50, 180, and 70. Because the p-value was <0.01, a statistically significant variation has been observed. Conclusion In the diagnosis of neural and perineuronal disorders, the visibility scores for 3D T2 TSE (VISTA) were considerably better than those for 2D T2 TSE in identifying perineural cysts, spinal canal stenosis, and nerve root indentation.
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.