ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2026
Non-Contrast Assessment of Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability to Water: Improved Signal Modeling and Data Acquisition.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Imaging Venous Transit Time and Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability of the Deep Brain.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Blood-brain barrier water permeability is elevated in type 2 diabetes and obesity: associations with cognitive function and metabolic markers.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2026Article
- Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability Is Elevated in Type 2 Diabetes and Obesity: Associations with Cognitive Function and Metabolic Markers.Research square · 2026Article
- Non-Contrast Assessment of Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability to Water: Improved Signal Modeling and Data Acquisition.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWater-extraction-with-phase-contrast-arterial-spin-tagging (WEPCAST) MRI is a non-contrast method to estimate the blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability to water. Similar to other arterial-spin-labeling (ASL) based techniques, signal-to-noise ratio is a limitation. This study aims to enhance its reliability via theoretical and experimental improvements.
methodsWe propose a generalized-venous-signal (GVS) model to describe the signal evolution of WEPCAST MRI, with which the control and labeled signals can be utilized to simultaneously estimate the water extraction fraction (E) and venous transit time (VTT). We conducted studies to test its feasibility and inter-visit reproducibility. We further made an experimental improvement by adding a 1-min blood T
resultsWhen applying the GVS model-based method at different locations along the superior sagittal sinus (SSS), VTT increased from anterior to posterior segments while E remained constant, consistent with known physiology. BBB permeability-surface-area-product (PS) revealed a significantly lower CoV of 5.0% ± 4.1% when using the GVS method, in comparison with 8.9% ± 6.5% using the peak-detection method (p = 0.002). Blood T
conclusionThe reliability of WEPCAST MRI for the measurement of BBB permeability can be improved by incorporating GVS model and individual blood T
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.