Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42189418›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2026

Comparison of three arm-positioning techniques for minimizing motion artifacts in breast magnetic resonance imaging: a prospective volunteer study.

Norikazu Koori, Minami Suzuki, Nobukiyo Yoshida, Shohei Yamamoto, Shin Miyakawa, Kota Sasaki, Hiroki Nosaka, Kenji Yasue, Masato Takahashi, Koichi Hanada and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Norikazu KooriDepartment of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Niigata city, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan. Norikazu-koori@nuhw.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1086-3945
Minami SuzukiDepartment of Radiology, Tsuchiura Kyodo General Hospital, 4-1-1 Otsuno, Tsuchiura, Ibaraki, 300-0028, Japan.
Nobukiyo YoshidaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Niigata city, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan.
Shohei YamamotoDepartment of Radiology, Tsuchiura Kyodo General Hospital, 4-1-1 Otsuno, Tsuchiura, Ibaraki, 300-0028, Japan.
Shin MiyakawaDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Kota SasakiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Hiroki NosakaDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Kenji YasueDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Masato TakahashiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Koichi HanadaDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.
Hajime IchikawaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Niigata city, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan.
Kazuyuki SumiDepartment of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Niigata city, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan.
Kazuya TakedaDepartment of Radiology, Fujita Health University Bantane Hospital, Nagoya, Aichi, 454-8509, Japan.
Hiraku FuseDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, 4669-2, Ami, Ibaraki, 300-0394, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assesses signal intensity changes across sequential image series (kinetic curves). Motion artifacts are common and often degrade image quality. However, the optimal patient positioning to minimize motion during breast MRI remains unclear. This study aimed to identify the most effective arm-positioning method for reducing motion artifacts during breast MRI.

methodsSix female volunteers underwent MRI at seven time points using enhanced T

resultsVES results were higher with both-arms-raised (2.52 ± 0.43; median: 2.60) than with arms-down (2.39 ± 0.61; median: 2.40) or the right-arm-raised (2.33 ± 0.57; median: 2.40). A significant difference in VES was observed between the both-arms-raised and right-arm-raised groups (P = .04). DDM values were lowest with both-arms-raised (1.02 ± 0.64; median: 0.85), followed by arm-down (1.89 ± 1.19; median: 1.50) and right-arm raised (1.65 ± 0.98; median: 1.56). Significant differences in DDM were observed between the both-arms-raised position and the other two positions (P < .05 and P < .001, respectively).

conclusionPositioning patients with both-arms-raised effectively minimized motion-related artifacts during breast MRI. Conversely, the right-arm-raised position was associated with increased artifacts and should be avoided to maintain image quality.

Indexed as

ArtifactsBreastMagnetic Resonance ImagingPatient PositioningAdultArmFemaleHumansMotionProspective StudiesBreast MRIDistance discordance metricMagnetic resonance imagingMotion artifactsPositioning method

Identifiers

PMID42189418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.