ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2007
Bone-subtraction CT angiography: evaluation of two different fully automated image-registration procedures for interscan motion compensation.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- 128-slice acceletated-pitch dual energy CT angiography of the head and neck: comparison of different low contrast medium volumes.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Optimizing contrast protocol for bone-subtraction CT angiography of intracranial arteries in normal dogs using 160-slice CT.Veterinary medicine and science · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Different Registration Algorithms to Reduce Motion Artifacts in CT-Thermography (CTT).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Metallic Component Preserving Algorithm Based on the Cerebral Computed Tomography Angiography in Aneurysm Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Virtual non-calcium dual-energy CT: clinical applications.European radiology experimental · 2021Review
- Dual Energy Computed Tomography of Internal Carotid Artery: A Modified Dual-Energy Algorithm for Calcified Plaque Removal, Compared With Digital Subtraction Angiography.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Bone-Subtracted Spinal CT Angiography Using Nonrigid Registration for Better Visualization of Arterial Feeders in Spinal Arteriovenous Fistulas.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2015Article
- Dual-energy CT head bone and hard plaque removal for quantification of calcified carotid stenosis: utility and comparison with digital subtraction angiography.European radiology · 2009Article
- Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in carotid artery disease: does automated image registration improve image quality?European radiology · 2009Article
- Multi-detector row CT angiography with direct intra-arterial contrast injection for the evaluation of neurovascular disease: technique, applications, and initial experience.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeBone-subtraction techniques have been shown to enhance CT angiography (CTA) interpretation, but motion can lead to incomplete bone removal. The aim of this study was to evaluate 2 novel registration techniques to compensate for patient motion. MATERIALS AND
methodsFifty-four patients underwent bone-subtraction CTA (BSCTA) for the evaluation of the neck vessels with 64-section CT. We tested 3 different registration procedures: pure rigid registration (BSCTA), slab-based registration (SB-BSCTA), and a partially rigid registration (PR-BSCTA) approach. Subtraction quality for the assessment of different vascular segments was evaluated by 2 examiners in a blinded fashion. The Cohen kappa test was applied for interobserver variability, and the Wilcoxon signed rank test, for differences between the procedures. Motion between the corresponding datasets was measured and plotted against image-quality scores.
resultsAlgorithms with motion compensation revealed higher image-quality scores (SB-BSCTA, mean 4.31; PR-BSCTA, mean 4.43) than pure rigid registration (BSCTA, mean 3.88). PR-BSCTA was rated superior to SB-BSCTA for the evaluation of the cervical internal and external carotid arteries (P<.001), whereas there was no significant difference for the other vessels (P=.157-.655). Both algorithms were clearly superior to pure rigid registration for all vessels except the basilar and ophthalmic artery. Interobserver agreement was high (kappa=0.46-0.98).
conclusionBone-subtraction algorithms with motion compensation provided higher image-quality scores than pure rigid registration methods, especially in cases with complex motion. PR-BSCTA was rated superior to SB-BSCTA in the visualization of the internal and external carotid arteries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.