ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
DWI of the rectum with deep learning reconstruction: comparison of PROPELLER, reduced FOV, and conventional DWI.
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.
- Diffusion MRI of the Body: Beyond PGSE-EPI.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Review
- Intravoxel incoherent motion imaging with improved image quality by deep learning reconstruction for prediction of lymph-vascular space invasion in patients with cervical cancer.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER), reduced field-of-view (rFOV), and conventional diffusion-weighted imaging (cDWI) combined with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) for evaluating rectal tumors.
methodsThis prospective study included 42 MRI examinations of 38 patients with rectal tumors who underwent initial staging and/or restaging MRI. PROPELLER-DWI, rFOV-DWI, and cDWI obtained with DLR were reviewed by two radiologists and compared for image quality and diagnostic performance for local tumor extent at staging and restaging and response to chemoradiotherapy at restaging.
resultsPROPELLER-DWI had significantly the least artifacts and distortions, but the worst perceptive noise, while rFOV-DWI had significantly the best sharpness for both readers (P < 0.01). For overall image quality and rectal/tumor conspicuity, PROPELLER-DWI and rFOV-DWI were significantly superior to cDWI in both readers (P < 0.01). The incidence of suboptimal image quality was significantly lower with PROPELLER-DWI and rFOV-DWI than with cDWI (5 and 1 patients with PROPELLER-DWI, 14 and 6 with rFOV-DWI, and 29 and 25 with cDWI by the 2 readers, P < 0.01). Although there were no significant differences in the accuracy of staging and restaging among the 3 types of DWI, inter-reader agreement was highest for PROPELLER-DWI (weighted kappa, 0.62-0.71) compared with cDWI (weighted kappa, 0.38-0.52) and rFOV-DWI (weighted kappa, 0.47-0.61).
conclusionsPROPELLER-DWI and rFOV-DWI with DLR may improve the image quality of rectal DWI by reducing artifacts and distortions or increasing sharpness, although the impact on diagnostic accuracy was not significant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40244478What 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.