ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2025
Deep learning-based acceleration of high-resolution compressed sense MR imaging of the hip.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: To evaluate a Compressed Sense Artificial Intelligence framework (CSAI) incorporating parallel imaging, compressed sense (CS), and deep learning for high-resolution MRI of the hip, comparing it with standard-resolution CS imaging. Methods: Thirty-two patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome underwent 3 T MRI scans. Coronal and sagittal intermediate-weighted TSE sequences with fat saturation were acquired using CS (0.6 ×0.8 mm resolution) and CSAI (0.3 ×0.4 mm resolution) protocols in comparable acquisition times (7:49 vs. 8:07 minutes for both planes). Two readers systematically assessed the depiction of the acetabular and femoral cartilage (in five cartilage zones), labrum, ligamentum capitis femoris, and bone using a five-point Likert scale. Diagnostic confidence and abnormality detection were recorded and analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: CSAI significantly improved the cartilage depiction across most cartilage zones compared to CS. Overall Likert scores were 4.0 ± 0.2 (CS) vs 4.2 ± 0.6 (CSAI) for reader 1 and 4.0 ± 0.2 (CS) vs 4.3 ± 0.6 (CSAI) for reader 2 (p ≤ 0.001). Diagnostic confidence increased from 3.5 ± 0.7 and 3.9 ± 0.6 (CS) to 4.0 ± 0.6 and 4.1 ± 0.7 (CSAI) for readers 1 and 2, respectively (p ≤ 0.001). More cartilage lesions were detected with CSAI, with significant improvements in diagnostic confidence in certain cartilage zones such as femoral zone C and D for both readers. Labrum and ligamentum capitis femoris depiction remained similar, while bone depiction was rated lower. No abnormalities detected in CS were missed in CSAI. Conclusion: CSAI provides high-resolution hip MR images with enhanced cartilage depiction without extending acquisition times, potentially enabling more precise hip cartilage assessment.
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.