ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Multi-band vs. conventional diffusion-weighted MRI of the abdomen in children and young adults.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of a cervical cancer-specific restriction spectrum imaging (RSI) model.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2026Article
- Practical approach to quantitative liver and pancreas MRI in children.Pediatric radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesImplementation of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for abdominal imaging in children has challenges due to motion artifacts exacerbated by long acquisition times. We aimed to compare acquisition time and image quality between conventional DWI and multi-band (MB) DWI of the liver in children and young adults.
methodsClinical MRI exams from May 2023 to January 2024 were reviewed, including four DWI sequences: respiratory-triggered (RTr, clinical standard), free-breathing (FB), MB-DWI with shift factor 1 (MBsf1), and MB-DWI with shift factor 2 (MBsf2). Acquisition times were recorded, and signal intensity and apparent signal-to-noise ratio (aSNR) were calculated for the liver and spleen. Six blinded pediatric radiologists independently assessed image quality, artifacts, and lesion visualization on a 5-point Likert scale and identified their preferred sequence. Statistical comparisons were made using Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA tests.
resultsMedian acquisition times were significantly reduced with MB-DWI (43 s for MBsf1/MBsf2) compared to FB (84 s) and RTr (240 s). Image quality and artifact scores were highest for RTr and FB sequences (p < 0.0001). Mean image quality scores were 3.7 (RTr, FB), 3.4 (MBsf1), and 3.5 (MBsf2), while artifact scores followed a similar trend (higher score = fewer artifacts). Lesion visualization scores were comparable across sequences (p = 0.11), and reviewers expressed no preference in 47% of cases. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were consistent across all sequences (p > 0.05).
conclusionMB-DWI significantly reduces acquisition time while maintaining acceptable image quality and lesion visualization, making it a valuable option for pediatric abdominal MRI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39718630What 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.