ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2026
Pulmonary Transit Time Can Be Accurately Quantified From Non-Arterial Input Function Series in First-Pass Cardiac Perfusion MRI.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pulmonary Transit Time Can Be Accurately Quantified From Non-Arterial Input Function Series in First-Pass Cardiac Perfusion MRI.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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePrevious studies suggested that arterial-input-function (AIF) images are necessary to avoid signal saturation for pulmonary transit time (PTT) measurements. This study challenges that notion by investigating whether PTT can be accurately measured using blood pool signals from myocardial enhancement (non-AIF) images during resting first-pass perfusion MRI.
methodsThis retrospective study included 108 patients, 47 scanned using a research radial perfusion sequence, and 61 scanned with a prototype Cartesian quantitative perfusion (qPerf) sequence with inline PTT calculation. An automated pipeline was developed to compute PTT measurements from blood pool signals extracted from both AIF and non-AIF images, as well as from gadolinium concentration curves of the AIF images, using three methods: peak-to-peak timing, area-under-the-curve (AUC) derived centroids, and curve-fitting derived centroids.
resultsPeak-to-peak PTT showed low bias (0.10-0.56 s; [1.4%-7.4%] of the mean), wide limits of agreement (5.71-7.42 s; [74.5%-109.8%]). In contrast, centroid-based methods, using both AUC and curve-fitting approaches, consistently yielded low bias (< 0.49 s; < 6.3%), narrower limits of agreement (1.83-2.84 s; 25.2%-36.8%). These findings indicate that centroid methods offer more precise and reliable PTT estimation across both radial perfusion and qPerf datasets.
conclusionsPTT can be derived accurately from non-AIF images using either the AUC or curve-fitting centroid-to-centroid method.
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.