ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Image quality comparison of 1.5T and 3T prostate MRIs of the same post-hip arthroplasty patients: multi-rater assessments including PI-QUAL version 2.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based prostate cancer diagnosis on MRI with hip prostheses: artifact and sequence effects.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Diffusion-weighted Imaging Distortion in Prostate MRI: A Cross-sectional Study Comparing Supine and Prone Positioning.Investigative radiology · 2026Article
- Prostate MRI quality improvement: a Roadmap from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group.European radiology · 2026Review
- Prostate MRI cancer detection rate by deep learning-assisted image quality categorization: gas-induced susceptibility artifacts in diffusion-weighted imaging.Insights into imaging · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the image quality of 1.5T and 3T prostate MRIs of the same post-hip arthroplasty patients, with a specific focus on the degree of susceptibility artifacts.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included post-hip arthroplasty patients who underwent 1.5T prostate MRIs between 2021 and 2023, as well as comparative 3T prostate MRIs. Three blinded abdominal radiologists retrospectively reviewed their diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI, 50 s/mm
resultsTwenty pairs of 1.5T and 3T prostate MRI examinations from 20 unique patients were included. The DWI susceptibility artifact score at 1.5T was significantly higher than at 3T (mean score ± standard deviation, 2.80 ± 0.41 vs. 2.35 ± 0.93, p = 0.014). In contrast, no significant differences were observed in the susceptibility artifact scores in T2WI and DCE, or in the PI-QUAL score. The inter-reader agreement in the susceptibility artifact score was moderate (multi-rater generalized kappa: 0.60) in DWI, perfect in T2WI (not applicable), and substantial (0.65) in DCE. The inter-reader agreement was fair (0.27) in the PI-QUAL score.
conclusionUsing 1.5T scanners may be preferable to reduce susceptibility artifacts from hip prostheses in DWI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38980403What 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.