ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2025
Deep Learning-Driven Abbreviated Shoulder MRI Protocols: Diagnostic Accuracy in Clinical Practice.
Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 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.
- Hierarchical Multimodal Fusion of Multi-Sequence MRI and Clinical Metadata for the Classification of Rotator Cuff Tears.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AI in Musculoskeletal Imaging: An End-to-End Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeep learning (DL) reconstruction techniques have shown promise in reducing MRI acquisition times while maintaining image quality. However, the impact of different acceleration factors on diagnostic accuracy in shoulder MRI remains unexplored in clinical practice. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 2-fold and 4-fold DL-accelerated shoulder MRI protocols compared to standard protocols in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective single-center study, 88 consecutive patients (49 males, 39 females; mean age, 51 years) underwent shoulder MRI examinations using standard, 2-fold (DL2), and 4-fold (DL4) accelerated protocols between June 2023 and January 2024. Four independent radiologists (experience range: 4-25 years) evaluated the presence of bone marrow edema (BME), rotator cuff tears, and labral lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated. Diagnostic confidence was assessed using a 4-point scale. The impact of reader experience was analyzed by stratifying the radiologists into ≤10 and >10 years of experience.
resultsBoth accelerated protocols demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. For BME detection, DL2 and DL4 achieved 100% sensitivity and specificity. In rotator cuff evaluation, DL2 showed a sensitivity of 98-100% and specificity of 99-100%, while DL4 maintained a sensitivity of 95-98% and specificity of 99-100%. Labral tear detection showed perfect sensitivity (100%) with DL2 and slightly lower sensitivity (89-100%) with DL4. Interobserver agreement was excellent across the protocols (Kendall's W = 0.92-0.98). Reader experience did not significantly impact diagnostic performance. The area under the ROC curve was 0.94 for DL2 and 0.90 for DL4 ( CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The implementation of DL-accelerated protocols, particularly DL2, could improve workflow efficiency by reducing acquisition times by 50% while maintaining diagnostic reliability. This could increase patient throughput and accessibility to MRI examinations without compromising diagnostic quality.
conclusionsDL-accelerated shoulder MRI protocols demonstrate high diagnostic accuracy, with DL2 showing performance nearly identical to that of the standard protocol. While DL4 maintains acceptable diagnostic accuracy, it shows a slight sensitivity reduction for subtle pathologies, particularly among less experienced readers. The DL2 protocol represents an optimal balance between acquisition time reduction and diagnostic confidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.