ArticleCurrent medical imaging2026
Effect of Slice Thickness Variations on Knee Cartilage Quantification Using Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation Sequenc
Article in Current medical imaging, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of varying slice thickness on quantitative values using the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) sequence.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 23 healthy subjects underwent the MAGiC sequence (at 3.0 T) with three slice thicknesses: 3 mm (TH3), 4 mm (TH4), and 5 mm (TH5). The T1, T2, and PD values were measured in various knee joint cartilage regions by two experienced radiologists, including the lateral femoral condyle (LFC), lateral tibial plateau (LTP), medial femoral condyle (MFC), medial tibial plateau (MTP), patella (PAT), and trochlea (TRO). The effects of varying slice thicknesses (TH4 vs. TH3 and TH5 vs. TH3) were analyzed using paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed rank tests, with statistical significance set at P < 0.025. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were also assessed.
resultsMeasurements of T1, T2, and PD values demonstrated high intra- and inter-rater reliability. Minimal differences were observed across slice thicknesses for T1WI, T2WI, and PDWI images. T2 and PD values showed little variation, while T1 mapping revealed significant differences. T2 values were consistent across regions, except for the LFC. DISCUSSION: TH4 and TH5 can replace TH3 for knee joint scanning while reducing scan time, with minimal differences in anatomical depiction across sequences. MAGiC technology significantly improves efficiency by acquiring quantitative data in a single scan, demonstrating stable T2 values unaffected by slice thickness, though T1 and PD values are thickness-dependent. This technique holds clinical value for cartilage injury assessment but requires further research on the applicability of multiplanar imaging.
conclusionT2 values obtained with the MAGiC sequence are stable across TH3, TH4, and TH5, allowing for reliable cartilage T2 quantification using TH5 to reduce patient scan time.
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.