Does a cleansing enema improve image quality of 3T surface coil multiparametric prostate MRI?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assesses the utility of a preparatory enema in the interpretation of prostate multiparametric (MP) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Under a waiver from the Institutional Review Board (IRB), 32 patients without bowel preparation and 28 patients who underwent a self-administered enema were imaged consecutively with 3T MP-MRI over 6 months. Two blinded radiologists independently assessed image quality on T2 -weighted (T2 W), trace b 1000 mm(2) /sec echo-planar (EPI) and apparent-diffusion coefficient (ADC) and assessed for motion/blur on T2 W and distortion/blur on EPI and ADC. Radiologists also quantified rectal stool and gas. A third blinded radiologist generated contrast curves from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) data at six locations and measured the number of corrupted data points, defined as >10% aberrant signal intensity change. Subjective scores were compared using Wilcoxon sign rank test. Rectal contents were correlated to artifact using Spearman correlation. Contrast curves were evaluated with independent t-tests. RESULTS: There was no difference in image quality on T2 W (P = 0.66-0.74), EPI (P = 0.13-0.36) or ADC (P = 0.49-0.59). There was less rectal stool in the enema group (P = 0.004) and amount of stool correlated with motion artifact on T2 W (r = 0.23, P = 0.02); however, there was no difference in motion artifact between groups (P = 0.47-0.94). Only a minority of patients in the non-enema group had moderate or large amounts of stool (16%) and none of these patients had severe or extensive artifact on T2 . There was less rectal gas in the enema group (P = 0.002); however, amount of gas did not correlate with distortion artifact on EPI or ADC (P = 0.17-0.41) and there was no difference in blur (P = 0.41-0.91) or distortion (P = 0.31-0.99) on EPI or ADC between groups. There was no difference in corrupted data points on DCE (P = 0.46). CONCLUSION: In this study the use of a preparatory enema did not improve image quality or reduce artifact in prostate MP-MRI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".