Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39607907›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025

Exploring the need for a preload on the estimation of permeability, vessel radius, and relative cerebral blood volume in MR vascular fingerprinting-based dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging.

Daniëlle van Dorth, Krishnapriya Venugopal, Karen N van der Werff, Marion Smits, Esther A H Warnert, Juan A Hernandez-Tamames, Matthias J P van Osch, Dirk H J Poot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

8 authors.

Daniëlle van DorthC. J. Gorter MRI Center, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7535-8072
Krishnapriya VenugopalDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6193-9674
Karen N van der WerffDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-1023-9204
Marion SmitsDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5563-2871
Esther A H WarnertDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3196-1416
Juan A Hernandez-TamamesDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0027-9518
Matthias J P van OschC. J. Gorter MRI Center, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7034-8959
Dirk H J PootDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0656-2963

Funding

Toegepaste en Technische Wetenschappen, NWO 17079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI is commonly part of the clinical brain tumor imaging protocol. Usually, a preload of contrast agent is administered to minimize contrast-leakage T

methodsA previously established simulation model was used to create a dictionary of DSC-MRVF signals resulting from a double-bolus injection with varying input values for permeability, vessel radius, and relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV). A sensitivity analysis based on a Cramer Rao Lower Bound approach was performed, from which the logarithmic ratio of standard deviations for parameter estimation was derived. A ratio above zero corresponded with a better determination without preload. Two brain tumor patients were included for validation.

resultsThe results show that the standard deviation for determining permeability was lower without preload, whereas for determining rCBV, the opposite result was found. For vessel radius, the standard deviation was similar with and without preload. The in vivo data reasonably agreed with the simulation results.

conclusionThis work has shown the potential of DSC-MRVF with a single bolus injection for determining vessel radius and permeability, although for rCBV, a preload is still advisable.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsCerebral Blood VolumeCerebrovascular CirculationContrast MediaImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance AngiographyMagnetic Resonance ImagingAlgorithmsBrainCapillary PermeabilityComputer SimulationFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleContrast Mediadynamic susceptibility contrast MRIfingerprintingpreloadvasculature

Identifiers

PMID39607907
PMCPMC11782708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.