ArticleScientific reports2025
Direct shoulder MR arthrography using an iron-based positive T1 contrast agent (NEMO-103): comparison of image quality with gadolinium-based contrast.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for alternative MR contrast agents in direct shoulder MR arthrography (MRA) arises from limitations associated with gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs), which are deemed "off-label" for MRA and raise concerns about potential toxicity to joint tissue. This study aims to compare the image quality of NEMO-103 (codename)-based and GBCA-based direct shoulder MRA. A total of 89 MRAs from 81 patients were analyzed, with 39 NEMO-103-based MRAs from 31 patients and 50 GBCA-based MRAs from 50 patients. The MRAs were performed at 3.0-T using fast/turbo spin-echo T1- and T2-weighted images with or without fat suppression (spectral presaturation with inversion recovery). Participants included individuals undergoing MRA for suspected or diagnosed shoulder pathologies between August 2021 and September 2022. Quantitative assessments (contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR] and distension measurements) and qualitative evaluations (distension, sharpness, contrast, and overall image quality scores) were conducted by three musculoskeletal radiologists. A visual Turing test (VTT) was used to assess the ability of 39 clinicians to differentiate between the two contrast agents. Statistical tests included the Shapiro-Wilk test, independent t-tests, and chi-squared test. The study compared 31 NEMO-103-based MRAs (11 females [35.5%], age: 40.0 ± 13.0 years) and 38 GBCA-based MRAs (14 females [36.8%], age: 49.4 ± 18.7 years) within 30 min post-injection, and 8 NEMO-103-based MRAs (3 females [37.5%], age: 38.0 ± 7.8 years) versus 12 GBCA-based MRAs (5 females [41.7%], age: 56.2 ± 15.7 years) in the 30-60-min post-injection timeframe. NEMO-103-based MRAs demonstrated superior axillary pouch distension and overall image quality in both comparisons. CNR was notably higher with NEMO-103. The VTT showed a 53.3% accuracy in differentiating NEMO-103 from GBCA, similar to random guessing. NEMO-103 may serve as a potential alternative to GBCAs for direct shoulder MRA, offering comparable or superior image quality with potentially fewer concerns related to gadolinium-associated toxicity.
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.