ArticleInvestigative radiology2025
Improving Spatial Accuracy of MRI in the Presence of Metal-induced Geometric Distortions.
Article in Investigative radiology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify sequences and protocols for minimal metal-induced geometric distortion (MD) for improved spatial accuracy in MRI. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 3D lattice phantom containing a stainless-steel bracket or a crown-supported titanium implant was scanned using 6 MRI sequences (TSE, SEMAC, CS-SEMAC, SPACE, VIBE, and research sequence MSVAT-SPACE) in a 3T system. MD was assessed at 9360 crossing points as Euclidean distance using a standardized algorithm. MD was analyzed by total MD, affected volume (AV) at various thresholds, and directional dependency. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA.
resultsFor the stainless-steel bracket, TSE showed the highest total MD among all sequences (2187±297 mm, P<0.01) and maximum displacement (>4 mm), with 467 mL AV at MD>0.5 mm. CS-SEMAC and SEMAC yielded the lowest MD among all sequences (469±75 mm and 502±154 mm, P<0.01) and the smallest AV (55 mL and 45 mL) at MD>0.5 mm. 3D sequences exhibited intermediate performance with no significant difference (MSVAT-SPACE/VIBE/SPACE: 1569±204 mm/1137±71 mm/1513±143 mm; P>0.08). For the crown-supported titanium implant, all sequences showed reduced MD (<440 mm) and AV (<71 mL at MD>0.5 mm), while VIBE yielded a comparable AV (65 mL) but the highest MD (615 mm). MD was direction-dependent, particularly for the stainless-steel bracket, being highest along frequency-encoding direction (P<0.002); TSE also showed significantly higher MD in slice direction (P=0.0071), while distortions in phase direction were consistently lower.
conclusionsSusceptibility artifact reduction sequences, particularly SEMAC and CS-SEMAC, effectively reduce total-MD by 79% and AV by 90%. Distortion varies by encoding direction and is most severe along the frequency-encoding axis, highlighting the importance of sequence and parameter selection for accurate MRI near metal implants.
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.