Back

Consensus-based technical recommendations for clinical translation of renal Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced (DCE) MRI

Gunwhy, E. R.; Kurugol, S.; Serai, S.; van der Molen, A. J.; Abou El-Ghar, M.; Buckley, D. L.; Hockings, P. D.; Jones, R. A.; Lim, R. P.; Mendichovszky, I. A.; Pedersen, M.; Reynolds, H. M.; Sanmiguel Serpa, L. C.; Wentland, A.; Zoellner, F. G.; Sourbron, S.; Dekkers, I. A.

2026-05-14 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.05.11.26352525 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundDynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI has the potential to be a useful tool for non-invasively assessing renal haemodynamics and function, however insufficient standardisation and difficulties in post-processing remain barriers to clinical translation. PurposeTo develop expert consensus-based technical recommendations for performing renal DCE-MRI in humans, relating to aspects of patient preparation, MRI hardware and acquisition parameters, and data analysis. Study TypeSystematic consensus process using an approximation to the two-step modified Delphi method. PopulationNot applicable. Field Strength / Sequence1.5 T and 3 T / Renal gradient echo-based 3D DCE-MRI. AssessmentAn international panel of experts were recruited and surveyed following a modified Delphi method to create consensus-based technical recommendations. Key areas for consensus were initially identified through a mixture of online and in-person discussions, and an initial survey round consisting of open- and close-ended questions. Consensus statements were formulated and iteratively refined to create the final recommendations. Statistical TestsConsensus was defined as [≥] 75% agreement in response (excluding abstentions), and clear preference was defined as [60-74]% agreement among the experts. Statements with [≥]40% abstentions were either excluded from subsequent survey rounds or recirculated as a modified statement. Results22 experts initially participated in the Delphi panel, of which 16 responded to the first survey. 15 panellists responded to all subsequent surveys. Out of 46 statements, 37 reached consensus and one showed clear preference. [≥]40% abstention was found in seven statements which were excluded from the final set of recommendations. Data conclusionThese recommendations provide a starting point for MRI centres worldwide wishing to perform renal DCE-MRI, contributing to the harmonisation of DCE-MRI scan protocols and facilitating clinical translation. These recommendations provide a practical minimum technical dataset for renal DCE-MRI acquisition and analysis to improve cross-site comparability and support responsible clinical translation.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.4%
2
NMR in Biomedicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.4%
3
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.7%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.1%
50% of probability mass above
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
6
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
7
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.3%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.9%
9
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
11
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
12
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
13
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
14
Brain Structure and Function
83 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
15
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.7%
17
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
18
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
19
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
20
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
21
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
22
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
23
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%