Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42687357›Full record

ArticleNMR in biomedicine2026

Feasibility of Spin- and Gradient-Echo Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MRI for Microvascular Characterization at 7 Tesla.

Karen N van der Werff, Daniëlle van Dorth, Krishnapriya Venugopal, Esther A H Warnert, Dirk H J Poot, Frans M Vos, Marion Smits, Stefan Klein, C Chad Quarles, Juan A Hernandez-Tamames and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in NMR in biomedicine, 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

13 authors.

Karen N van der WerffDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1023-9204
Daniëlle van DorthC. J. Gorter MRI Center, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7535-8072
Krishnapriya VenugopalDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Esther A H WarnertDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3196-1416
Dirk H J PootDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0656-2963
Frans M VosDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8688-9546
Marion SmitsDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5563-2871
Stefan KleinDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4449-6784
C Chad QuarlesDepartment of Cancer Systems Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Juan A Hernandez-TamamesDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0027-9518
Johan A F KoekkoekDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3648-9616
Jeroen de BresserDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Matthias J P van OschMedical Delta, Delft, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7034-8959

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 17079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perfusion MRI, especially dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC), is vital for glioma diagnosis and monitoring. While gradient-echo DSC is the current recommended implementation, combined spin- and gradient-echo (SAGE) DSC additionally allows for vessel size imaging (VSI) and has shown feasibility for microvascular characterization at 3 T. Higher field strength MRI offers increased contrast, resolution and signal-to-noise ratio, providing potential to improve microvascular characterization. This feasibility study aimed to implement a protocol for SAGE-DSC at 7 T and study its potential for microvascular characterization. SAGE-DSC was acquired in eight patients undergoing treatment for glioma (four females, median age 57 years) at 3 and 7 T. Data were analyzed using the temporal signal-to-noise ratio (tSNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and by comparing perfusion maps, VSI and vascular architectural imaging (VAI). Simulations were performed to study the relationship between vessel size and

Indexed as

Contrast MediaMagnetic Resonance ImagingMicrovesselsSpin LabelsAdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsDynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance ImagingFeasibility StudiesFemaleGliomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedPerfusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingSignal-To-Noise RatioContrast MediaSpin Labels7 Tesla (7 T)dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC)gliomaperfusionspin‐ and gradient‐echo (SAGE)vascular architectural imaging (VAI)vessel size imaging (VSI)

Identifiers

PMID42687357
PMCPMC13538972

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.