ReviewCureus2025
A Narrative Review of Advancements in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Technology: Evaluating the Shift From Helium-Cooled to Helium-Free Systems.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Helium-free MRI systems: What does that mean for a radiology decision maker?Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Helium Supply-Chain Vulnerability of MRI Services: A Global Ecological Analysis of Imaging Capacity and Health-System Resilience.NMR in biomedicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) traditionally relies on large liquid-helium inventories to maintain superconductivity, creating siting complexity and exposing providers to helium-supply volatility. Sealed-helium (zero-boil-off) designs reduce helium volumes to single-digit liters and may eliminate vent-pipe requirements, potentially broadening siting options and lowering operational risk. We conducted a narrative search of major databases and relevant gray literature to summarize the clinical performance, installation logistics, and operational metrics of sealed-helium systems across low, mid, and conventional field strengths. Peer-reviewed clinical studies remain small and heterogeneous. Early reader-blinded analyses suggest diagnostic adequacy for selected protocols at low and mid field, but robust equivalence to 1.5 T/3 T has not been demonstrated. Vendor materials' reports describe conduction-cooled magnets with homogeneity and stability compatible with clinical imaging. However, independent multicenter confirmation is limited. Vendor materials report substantial helium savings and vent-pipe-free installations, which require external validation. Overall, sealed-helium MRI appears operationally attractive and may support expanded access, particularly where siting barriers and helium logistics constrain capacity. To inform clinical and purchasing decisions, multicenter comparative studies and standardized operational benchmarks (energy use, uptime, and unplanned service) are needed alongside transparent reporting of vendor involvement.
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.