{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T03:59:24Z","timestamp":1790654364591,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":41,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]],"date-time":"2026-09-28T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790553600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]],"date-time":"2026-09-28T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790553600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"The Medical Innovation Project from the Fujian Provincial Health and Wellness Science and Technology Program","award":["2024CXB020"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["2024CXB020"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Eur Radiol"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To compare 5.0\u2009T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image quality versus 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T in patients and healthy volunteers, so as to validate its clinical feasibility.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Materials and methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>This prospective study included a patient cohort (348 consecutive patients undergoing upper abdominal MRI) and a healthy volunteer cohort (31 volunteers scanned on all three scanners). Two radiologists independently assessed image quality subjectively (5-point Likert scale: anatomical detail, artifacts, overall image quality, diagnostic confidence) and measured signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Subjective and objective metrics were compared across field strengths using overall and pairwise comparisons.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Objective metrics (left\/right\/mean liver SNR, muscle\/spleen SNR, liver-spleen CNR) showed a significant gradient of 5.0\u2009T\u2009&gt;\u20093.0\u2009T\u2009&gt;\u20091.5\u2009T in both cohorts (all\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001). Subjectively, compared with 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T, 5.0\u2009T received the lowest scores for cardiac motion artifact and liver signal uniformity on T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and showed greater distortion and ghosting artifacts on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (all\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.05). Nevertheless, 5.0\u2009T was significantly superior in anatomical detail, SNR, and overall image quality (all\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.05). In patients, 5.0\u2009T also achieved the highest diagnostic confidence (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.05). Results from healthy volunteers were largely consistent with those from the patient cohort.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>5.0\u2009T upper abdominal MRI, with a primary focus on liver imaging, is clinically feasible, offering superior anatomical detail, SNR, overall image quality, and diagnostic confidence over 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T, though cardiac motion artifacts, liver signal inhomogeneity on T2WI, and geometric distortion on DWI require further optimization.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Key Points<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Question<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>Is 5.0-T MRI superior to 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T for liver imaging, and does its diagnostic benefit differ between diseased and non-diseased livers?<\/jats:italic>\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Findings<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>5.0\u2009T provided significantly higher SNR, image quality, and diagnostic confidence than 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T, despite increased cardiac motion and liver signal inhomogeneity.<\/jats:italic>\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      <jats:bold>\n                        <jats:italic>Clinical relevance<\/jats:italic>\n                      <\/jats:bold>\n                      <jats:italic>5.0-T MRI significantly improves liver image quality and diagnostic confidence over 3.0\u2009T and 1.5\u2009T, supporting its clinical utility despite increased artifacts that require further optimization<\/jats:italic>\n                      .\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]],"date-time":"2026-09-28T14:11:15Z","timestamp":1790604675000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["5.0\u2009T versus 1.5\u2009T and 3.0\u2009T upper abdominal MRI: a prospective two\u2011cohort study of image quality and diagnostic confidence"],"prefix":"10.1007","author":[{"given":"Liuhong","family":"Zhu","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Danlan","family":"Lian","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Funan","family":"Wang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Anjie","family":"Xie","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jiaqi","family":"Wang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-8867-5122","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Hao","family":"Liu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jianjun","family":"Zhou","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]]},"reference":[{"key":"12874_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"20180492","DOI":"10.1259\/bjr.20180492","volume":"92","author":"G Barisano","year":"2019","unstructured":"Barisano G, Sepehrband F, Ma S et al (2019) Clinical 7 T MRI: Are we there yet? A review about magnetic resonance imaging at ultra-high field. Br J Radiol 92:20180492","journal-title":"Br J Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1316","DOI":"10.1002\/nbm.3272","volume":"29","author":"S Trattnig","year":"2016","unstructured":"Trattnig S, Bogner W, Gruber S et al (2016) Clinical applications at ultrahigh field (7T). Where does it make the difference? NMR Biomed 29:1316\u20131334","journal-title":"NMR Biomed"},{"key":"12874_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"680","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0000000000000812","volume":"56","author":"F Schick","year":"2021","unstructured":"Schick F, Pieper CC, Kupczyk P et al (2021) 1.5 vs 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: a review of favorite clinical applications for both field strengths\u2014Part 1. Invest Radiol 56:680\u2013691","journal-title":"Invest Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3389\/fneur.2023.1119965","volume":"14","author":"R Guillevin","year":"2023","unstructured":"Guillevin R, van der Kolk AG (2023) Editorial: Ultrahigh field metabolic MRI: current status, clinical applications, and future perspectives. Front Neurol 14:1119965","journal-title":"Front Neurol"},{"key":"12874_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3222","DOI":"10.21037\/qims-22-945","volume":"13","author":"Z Wei","year":"2023","unstructured":"Wei Z, Chen Q, Han S et al (2023) 5T magnetic resonance imaging: radio frequency hardware and initial brain imaging. Quant Imaging Med Surg 13:3222\u20133240","journal-title":"Quant Imaging Med Surg"},{"key":"12874_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.neurad.2025.101376","volume":"52","author":"SH Zhao","year":"2025","unstructured":"Zhao SH, Zhai YR, Zhou YJ et al (2025) 5.0T MRA techniques for evaluating Moyamoya disease: 4D-ASL-MRA vs. 3D-TOF-MRA. J Neuroradiol 52:101376","journal-title":"J Neuroradiol"},{"key":"12874_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3824","DOI":"10.21037\/qims-24-2274","volume":"15","author":"X Fan","year":"2025","unstructured":"Fan X, Li Z, Han G et al (2025) Whole-cerebrum three-dimensional pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling at 5T: reproducibility and preliminary application in moyamoya. Quant Imaging Med Surg 15:3824\u20133838","journal-title":"Quant Imaging Med Surg"},{"key":"12874_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1007\/s00117-023-01184-x","volume":"64","author":"S Trattnig","year":"2024","unstructured":"Trattnig S, Hangel G, Robinson SD et al (2024) Ultrahigh-field MRI: where it really makes a difference. Radiologie 64:1\u20138","journal-title":"Radiologie"},{"key":"12874_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"605","DOI":"10.1002\/ana.26734","volume":"94","author":"Y Wang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Wang Y, Fan X, Ni J et al (2023) Dilated juxtacortical perivascular spaces and venous cerebral microbleeds in cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related inflammation. Ann Neurol 94:605\u2013607","journal-title":"Ann Neurol"},{"key":"12874_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"581","DOI":"10.1007\/s11060-024-04759-3","volume":"169","author":"J Zhou","year":"2024","unstructured":"Zhou J, Sun W, Li H et al (2024) Application of 5T glutamate chemical exchange saturation transfer imaging in brain tumors: preliminary results. J Neurooncol 169:581\u2013589","journal-title":"J Neurooncol"},{"key":"12874_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41597-025-05640-2","volume":"12","author":"S Wang","year":"2025","unstructured":"Wang S, Yu S, Cheng J et al (2025) Diff5T: benchmarking human brain diffusion MRI with an extensive 5.0 Tesla k-space and spatial dataset. Sci Data 12:1352","journal-title":"Sci Data"},{"key":"12874_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.233424","volume":"313","author":"Y Guo","year":"2024","unstructured":"Guo Y, Lin L, Zhao S et al (2024) Myocardial fibrosis assessment at 3-T versus 5-T myocardial late gadolinium enhancement MRI: early results. Radiology 313:e233424","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"12874_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jocmr.2025.101896","volume":"27","author":"Y Guo","year":"2025","unstructured":"Guo Y, Lin L, Xu K et al (2025) Myocardial native T1 and extracellular volume measurements at 5T: feasibility study and initial experience. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 27:101896","journal-title":"J Cardiovasc Magn Reson"},{"key":"12874_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.240389","volume":"313","author":"H Lu","year":"2024","unstructured":"Lu H, Miao X, Wang D et al (2024) Feasibility and clinical application of 5-T noncontrast Dixon whole-heart coronary MR angiography: a prospective study. Radiology 313:e240389","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"12874_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.canlet.2025.217561","volume":"616","author":"X Li","year":"2025","unstructured":"Li X, Yang X, Lin S et al (2025) Perineural invasion in cervical cancer. Cancer Lett 616:217561","journal-title":"Cancer Lett"},{"key":"12874_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5324","DOI":"10.1007\/s00261-025-04954-4","volume":"50","author":"L Shen","year":"2025","unstructured":"Shen L, Cheng Y, Liu J et al (2025) Reduced FOV T2-weighted imaging, 2.5D T2-weighted imaging, and high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 5 T: a comparative study with 3 T. Abdom Radiol 50:5324\u20135337","journal-title":"Abdom Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"115","DOI":"10.1002\/jmri.70045","volume":"63","author":"S Liu","year":"2026","unstructured":"Liu S, Ni M, Wang D et al (2026) Clinical diagnostic value of 5 T MRI for knee injuries: a comparison study with 1.5 or 3 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 63:115\u2013127","journal-title":"J Magn Reson Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"171","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-023-01513-7","volume":"14","author":"Y Zhang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Zhang Y, Sheng R, Yang C et al (2023) Higher field reduced FOV diffusion-weighted imaging for abdominal imaging at 5.0 Tesla: image quality evaluation compared with 3.0 Tesla. Insights Imaging 14:171","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4148","DOI":"10.1007\/s00261-024-04680-3","volume":"50","author":"Q Xu","year":"2025","unstructured":"Xu Q, Zhao H, Gao R et al (2025) Insulinoma detection and surgery planning: a comparative study of 5.0T MRI versus 3.0T MRI and MDCT. Abdom Radiol 50:4148\u20134159","journal-title":"Abdom Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.21037\/qims-2025-1425","volume":"16","author":"X Zhao","year":"2026","unstructured":"Zhao X, Liu Y, Li S et al (2026) AI-assisted compressed sensing and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for evaluating colorectal liver metastases in complex hepatic backgrounds: a prospective 5T MRI study. Quant Imaging Med Surg 16:41","journal-title":"Quant Imaging Med Surg"},{"key":"12874_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2461","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-022-09278-1","volume":"33","author":"BV Becker","year":"2023","unstructured":"Becker BV, Kaatsch HL, Nestler K et al (2023) Initial experience on abdominal photon-counting computed tomography in clinical routine: general image quality and dose exposure. Eur Radiol 33:2461\u20132468","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12880-025-01838-3","volume":"25","author":"Q Tan","year":"2025","unstructured":"Tan Q, Kubicka F, Nickel D et al (2025) Optimized deep learning-accelerated single-breath-hold abdominal HASTE with and without fat saturation improves and accelerates abdominal imaging at 3 Tesla. BMC Med Imaging 25:369","journal-title":"BMC Med Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1567","DOI":"10.1007\/s00247-018-4187-8","volume":"48","author":"KR Suther","year":"2018","unstructured":"Suther KR, Hopp E, Smevik B et al (2018) Can visual analogue scale be used in radiologic subjective image quality assessment? Pediatr Radiol 48:1567\u20131575","journal-title":"Pediatr Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"155","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcm.2016.02.012","volume":"15","author":"TK Koo","year":"2016","unstructured":"Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155\u2013163","journal-title":"J Chiropr Med"},{"key":"12874_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12880-024-01270-z","volume":"24","author":"Z Jiang","year":"2024","unstructured":"Jiang Z, Sun W, Xu D et al (2024) The feasibility of half-dose contrast-enhanced scanning of brain tumours at 5.0 T: a preliminary study. BMC Med Imaging 24:88","journal-title":"BMC Med Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"155","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-022-01290-9","volume":"13","author":"L Zheng","year":"2022","unstructured":"Zheng L, Yang C, Sheng R, Dai Y, Zeng M (2022) Renal imaging at 5 T versus 3 T: a comparison study. Insights Imaging 13:155","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12880-024-01512-0","volume":"24","author":"L Yin","year":"2024","unstructured":"Yin L, Li Z, Shang M et al (2024) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T. BMC Med Imaging 24:331","journal-title":"BMC Med Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2457","DOI":"10.3390\/diagnostics14212457","volume":"14","author":"H Zhao","year":"2024","unstructured":"Zhao H, Xu Q, Gao R et al (2024) Clinical feasibility of 5.0 T MRI\/MRCP in characterizing pancreatic cystic lesions: comparison with 3.0 T and MDCT. Diagnostics 14:2457","journal-title":"Diagnostics"},{"key":"12874_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.4329\/wjr.v16.i1.20","volume":"16","author":"AS Perera Molligoda Arachchige","year":"2024","unstructured":"Perera Molligoda Arachchige AS, Teixeira de Castro Gon\u00e7alves Ortega AC, Catapano F et al (2024) From strength to precision: a systematic review exploring the clinical utility of 7-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging in abdominal imaging. World J Radiol 16:20\u201331","journal-title":"World J Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"138","DOI":"10.1515\/med-2017-0021","volume":"12","author":"H Ren","year":"2017","unstructured":"Ren H, Lin W, Ding X (2017) Surface coil intensity correction in magnetic resonance imaging in spinal metastases. Open Med 12:138\u2013143","journal-title":"Open Med"},{"key":"12874_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"585","DOI":"10.1007\/s11604-015-0463-9","volume":"33","author":"L Zhang","year":"2015","unstructured":"Zhang L, Tian C, Wang P et al (2015) Comparative study of image quality between axial T2-weighted BLADE and turbo spin-echo MRI of the upper abdomen on 3.0 T. Jpn J Radiol 33:585\u2013590","journal-title":"Jpn J Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejrad.2025.112156","volume":"188","author":"LM Loy","year":"2025","unstructured":"Loy LM, How GY, Low HM et al (2025) DWI\/ADC in response assessment after local-regional treatment of HCC\u2014pearls and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 188:112156","journal-title":"Eur J Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"490","DOI":"10.1007\/s00261-016-0913-6","volume":"42","author":"H Jiang","year":"2017","unstructured":"Jiang H, Chen J, Gao R et al (2017) Liver fibrosis staging with diffusion-weighted imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Abdom Radiol 42:490\u2013501","journal-title":"Abdom Radiol"},{"key":"12874_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1239","DOI":"10.1002\/mrm.23317","volume":"68","author":"SH Oh","year":"2012","unstructured":"Oh SH, Chung JY, In MH et al (2012) Distortion correction in EPI at ultra-high-field MRI using PSF mapping with optimal combination of shift detection dimension. Magn Reson Med 68:1239\u20131246","journal-title":"Magn Reson Med"},{"key":"12874_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1009","DOI":"10.1002\/jmri.28097","volume":"56","author":"Y Zhang","year":"2022","unstructured":"Zhang Y, Yang C, Liang L et al (2022) Preliminary experience of 5.0\u2009T higher field abdominal diffusion-weighted MRI: agreement of apparent diffusion coefficient with 3.0\u2009T imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 56:1009\u20131017","journal-title":"J Magn Reson Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"344","DOI":"10.1002\/mp.15970","volume":"50","author":"L Zheng","year":"2023","unstructured":"Zheng L, Yang C, Liang L et al (2023) T2-weighted MRI and reduced-FOV diffusion-weighted imaging of the human pancreas at 5 T: a comparison study with 3 T. Med Phys 50:344\u2013353","journal-title":"Med Phys"},{"key":"12874_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-023-38360-x","volume":"13","author":"Z Jiang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Jiang Z, Sun W, Xu D et al (2023) Stability and repeatability of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of normal pancreas on 5.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Sci Rep 13:11954","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"key":"12874_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"232","DOI":"10.2463\/mrms.mp.2021-0077","volume":"22","author":"K Fukushima","year":"2023","unstructured":"Fukushima K, Sano K, Machida H, Kariyasu T et al (2023) Effect of an ultrahigh b value of 3000 s\/mm2 and the minimal echo-time on image quality and the T2 shine-through effect in diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver at 3T: phantom and clinical pilot studies. Magn Reson Med Sci 22:232\u2013240","journal-title":"Magn Reson Med Sci"},{"key":"12874_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"59","DOI":"10.1016\/j.mri.2019.12.011","volume":"67","author":"SS Rauh","year":"2020","unstructured":"Rauh SS, Riexinger AJ, Ohlmeyer S et al (2020) A mixed waveform protocol for reduction of the cardiac motion artifact in black-blood diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver. Magn Reson Imaging 67:59\u201368","journal-title":"Magn Reson Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR40","first-page":"107","volume":"11","author":"YXJ Wang","year":"2021","unstructured":"Wang YXJ, Huang H, Zheng CJ et al (2021) Diffusion-weighted MRI of the liver: challenges and some solutions for the quantification of apparent diffusion coefficient and intravoxel incoherent motion. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 11:107\u2013142","journal-title":"Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"12874_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1839","DOI":"10.3390\/tomography9050146","volume":"9","author":"J Raspe","year":"2023","unstructured":"Raspe J, Harder FN, Rupp S et al (2023) Retrospective motion artifact reduction by spatial scaling of liver diffusion-weighted images. Tomography 9:1839\u20131856","journal-title":"Tomography"}],"container-title":["European Radiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T03:54:13Z","timestamp":1790654053000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]]},"references-count":41,"alternative-id":["12874"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00330-026-12874-0","relation":{},"ISSN":["1432-1084"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1432-1084","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,28]]},"assertion":[{"value":"10 May 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"11 July 2026","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"23 August 2026","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"28 September 2026","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Jianjun Zhou.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Guarantor","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflict of interest","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Jiaqi Wang kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","label":"Statistics and biometry","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Written informed consent was waived for Cohort A (clinical patient cohort) due to the use of de-identified routine clinical data and images. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in Cohort B (healthy volunteer cohort). Written informed consent for publication of the images shown in the figures was obtained from the depicted patient, and all identifying information has been removed to ensure anonymity.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","label":"Informed consent","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.","order":5,"name":"Ethics","label":"Ethical approval","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"value":"Study subjects or cohorts have not been previously reported.","order":6,"name":"Ethics","label":"Study subjects or cohorts overlap","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}},{"order":7,"name":"Ethics","label":"Methodology","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with ethical standards"}}]}}