ReviewInternational journal of biomedical imaging2025
Diagnostic Efficacy and Correlation of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) and Contrast-Enhanced (CE) MRI Perfusion Parameters in Oncology Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in International journal of biomedical imaging, 2025. 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.
- Diagnostic Efficacy and Correlation of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) and Contrast-Enhanced (CE) MRI Perfusion Parameters in Oncology Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a noncontrast technique estimating diffusion and perfusion parameters via multiple Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO-registered), a literature search across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) was conducted. Diagnostic metrics, including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and correlation coefficients, were analyzed using a random-effects model, with heterogeneity and publication bias assessed via Results: Eighteen studies on breast, rectal, and brain cancers were analyzed. For breast cancer, IVIM showed 83.50% sensitivity and 81.24% specificity compared to dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI's 88.04% sensitivity and 65.98% specificity. In rectal cancer, IVIM achieved 70.9% sensitivity and 56.2% specificity, outperforming DCE MRI's 58.11% sensitivity and 72.49% specificity. For gliomas, IVIM demonstrated 92.27% sensitivity and 74.06% specificity compared to dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI's 95.71% sensitivity and 92.91% specificity. Correlations between IVIM and CE parameters were weak to moderate. Conclusion: IVIM demonstrated equal or superior diagnostic performance to CE MRI in breast cancer, rectal cancer, and gliomas, offering a noncontrast alternative. However, unclear parameter correlations warrant future studies focusing on IVIM protocol optimization based on perfusion regimes.
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.