ArticleNeuroradiology2025
Comparison of multiple tractography pipelines for corticospinal tract reconstruction applied to brain tumor patients.
Article in Neuroradiology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDetermining the best-performing corticospinal tract (CST) tractography pipelines based on the experts score for patients with four types of edema degree and tumor locations. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-three patients were stratified into four groups based on tumor location and edema degree: tumors near the precentral cortex without edema, tumors near the precentral cortex with edema, tumors located deep without edema, and tumors located deep with edema. The dataset included 13 males and 10 females, with an average age of 51.04 ± 14.50 years. Diffusion MRI data (b = 1,000 s/mm
resultsTractSeg performed best for tumors without edema, achieving the highest expert score. UKF-2T and DSIstudio obtained the highest expert score when tumors with edema near the precentral cortex, and tumors located in deep brain, respectively. Quantitative results showed minimal interhemispheric differences in gray matter coverage for DSIstudio and UKF-2T, with slightly higher values on the healthy side. UKF-2T exhibited the highest CST volume. TractSeg generated the lowest false-positive streamlines.
conclusionsDifferent tumor locations and edema degrees require specific tractography pipelines. TractSeg is optimal for tumors without edema, while UKF-2T and DSIstudio are superior for tumors with edema.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41160112What 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.