Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39110181›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2025

Fat-signal suppression in breast diffusion-weighted imaging: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

Denis Le Bihan, Mami Iima, Savannah C Partridge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. BMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Breast Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging: Current Applications, Insights from Screening, and Future Directions.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Quantitative MR Imaging of the Breast.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
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

3 authors.

Denis Le BihanNeuroSpin, Joliot Institute, Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique (CEA), Paris-Saclay University, Bât 145, CEA-Saclay Center, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France. denis.lebihan@cea.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4454-729X
Mami IimaDepartment of Fundamental Development for Advanced Low Invasive Diagnostic Imaging, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Savannah C PartridgeDepartment of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

Elimination of Instrumental Bias for Quantitative Diffusion Imaging in Clinical Oncology TrialsR01CA190299 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MALYARENKO, DARIYA I. · 2015 to 2025
$6.4M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA190299
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFat-signal suppression is essential for breast diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (or diffusion-weighted MRI, DWI) as the very low diffusion coefficient of fat tends to decrease absolute diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. Among several methods, the STIR (short-tau inversion recovery) method is a popular approach, but signal suppression/attenuation is not specific to fat contrary to other methods such as SPAIR (spectral adiabatic (or attenuated) inversion recovery). This article focuses on those two techniques to illustrate the importance of appropriate fat suppression in breast DWI, briefly presenting the pros and cons of both approaches. METHODS AND

resultsWe show here through simulation and data acquired in a dedicated breast DWI phantom made of vials with water and various concentrations of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) how ADC values obtained with STIR DWI may be biased toward tissue components with the longest T1 values: ADC values obtained with STIR fat suppression may be over/underestimated depending on the T1 and ADC profile within tissues. This bias is also illustrated in two clinical examples.

conclusionFat-specific methods should be preferred over STIR for fat-signal suppression in breast DWI, such as SPAIR which also provides a higher sensitivity than STIR for lesion detection. One should remain aware, however, that efficient fat-signal suppression with SPAIR requires good B0 shimming to avoid ADC underestimation from residual fat contamination. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The spectral adiabatic (or attenuated) inversion recovery (SPAIR) method should be preferred over short-tau inversion recovery (STIR) for fat suppression in breast DWI. KEY POINTS: Fat-signal suppression is essential for breast DWI; the SPAIR method is recommended. Short-tau inversion recovery (STIR) is not specific to fat; as a result, SNR is decreased and ADC values may be over- or underestimated. The STIR fat-suppression method must not be used after the injection of gadolinium-based contrast agents.

Indexed as

Adipose TissueBreastBreast NeoplasmsDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingImage EnhancementFemaleHumansPhantoms, ImagingSensitivity and SpecificityBreast imagingDiffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imagingFat suppressionQuantitative imagingSignal to noise ratio

Identifiers

PMID39110181
PMCPMC11782347

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.