Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42084509›Full record

ArticleRadiology2026

Comparative Precision of 3D MRE and 2D MRE for Measurement of Liver Stiffness in Adults with Severe Obesity.

Lukas Müller, Lael Ceriani, David T Harris, Tanya Wolfson, Danielle Batakis, Rashmi Agni, Yesenia Covarrubias, Kay Pepin, Richard L Ehman, Jeremiah Heilman and 14 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors.

Lukas MüllerDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.ORCID 0000-0002-8626-4044
Lael CerianiDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0000-0003-4427-4161
David T HarrisDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.ORCID 0000-0002-1150-8702
Tanya WolfsonComputational and Applied Statistical Laboratory (CASL), San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Danielle BatakisDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Rashmi AgniDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.
Yesenia CovarrubiasDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Kay PepinResoundant, Rochester, Minn.
Richard L EhmanDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.ORCID 0000-0001-7041-5074
Jeremiah HeilmanResoundant, Rochester, Minn.
Nikolaos PanagiotopoulosDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
Gavin HamiltonDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0000-0001-9302-5546
Michael S MiddletonDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Vitor F MartinsDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0000-0002-9060-1314
Anthony C GamstComputational and Applied Statistical Laboratory (CASL), San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Ryan SappenfieldDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.ORCID 0000-0001-7397-4330
Eduardo GrunvaldDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0000-0001-9332-7069
Luke M FunkDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.ORCID 0000-0003-4475-304X
Garth R JacobsenDepartment of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
Anne O LidorDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.
James A GoodmanTranslational Clinical Sciences, Pfizer Research & Development, Cambridge, Mass.ORCID 0000-0002-6055-7885
Sami B KhouryDepartment of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0009-0006-0380-2887
Claude B Sirlin *Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif.ORCID 0000-0002-6639-9072
Scott B Reeder *Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.ORCID 0000-0003-4728-8171

Funding

Technical Validation of MRI Biomarkers of Liver FatR01DK088925 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI REEDER, SCOTT B., SIRLIN, CLAUDE B · 2010 to 2021
$7.1M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK088925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The comparative precision of two-dimensional (2D) MR elastography (MRE) and three-dimensional (3D) MRE for measuring liver stiffness (LS) in adults with severe obesity is unknown. Purpose To compare test-retest repeatability, between-day reproducibility, and between-field-strength reproducibility of 2D MRE- and 3D MRE-based LS measurements in adults with severe obesity. Materials and Methods In this prospective dual-center study (December 2020 to August 2023), adults with severe obesity underwent 2D MRE and 3D MRE at one visit before weight loss surgery and two visits after. At each visit, MRE was repeated with interexamination repositioning at 3 T to assess test-retest repeatability, or at 1.5 T and 3 T to assess between-field-strength reproducibility. Some participants also underwent MRE 1-3 days before visit 1 to assess between-day reproducibility at 1.5 T or 3 T. All participant visits were performed at the same site. Absolute repeatability coefficient (RC) and proportional RC (RC%), absolute reproducibility coefficient (RDC) and proportional RDC (RDC%), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and technical failure rates were computed for 2D MRE-based and 3D MRE-based LS and compared pairwise (bootstrap-based tests or McNemar test of paired proportions for clustered data, as appropriate). Results In a total of 103 participants (mean age, 44 years ± 10.0; 89 women), LS ranges were 2.2 kPa ± 0.4 with 2D MRE and 2.0 kPa ± 0.3 with 3D MRE. At 3 T, 3D MRE had better test-retest repeatability than did 2D MRE (RC, 0.26 vs 0.55 kPa, respectively; RC%, 12.6% vs 19.9%; ICC, 0.85 vs 0.67; all

Indexed as

Elasticity Imaging TechniquesImaging, Three-DimensionalLiverObesity, MorbidAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID42084509
PMCPMC13216705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.