Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23636300›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2013

First in vivo head-to-head comparison of high-definition versus standard-definition stent imaging with 64-slice computed tomography.

Tobias A Fuchs, Julia Stehli, Michael Fiechter, Svetlana Dougoud, Bert-Ram Sah, Cathérine Gebhard, Sacha Bull, Oliver Gaemperli, Philipp A Kaufmann

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cardiac CT: atherosclerosis to acute coronary syndrome.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2014
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

9 authors.

Tobias A FuchsDepartment of Radiology, Cardiac Imaging, University Hospital Zurich, Ramistrasse 100, NUK C 42, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Julia Stehli
Michael Fiechter
Svetlana Dougoud
Bert-Ram Sah
Cathérine Gebhard
Sacha Bull
Oliver Gaemperli
Philipp A Kaufmann

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare image quality characteristics from 64-slice high definition (HDCT) versus 64-slice standard definition CT (SDCT) for coronary stent imaging. In twenty-five stents of 14 patients, undergoing contrast-enhanced CCTA both on 64-slice SDCT (LightSpeedVCT, GE Healthcare) and HDCT (Discovery HD750, GE Healthcare), radiation dose, contrast, noise and stent characteristics were assessed. Two blinded observers graded stent image quality (score 1 = no, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe artefacts). All scans were reconstructed with increasing contributions of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) blending (0, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100 %). Image quality was significantly superior in HDCT versus SDCT (score 1.7 ± 0.5 vs. 2.7 ± 0.7; p < 0.05). Image noise was significantly higher in HDCT compared to SDCT irrespective of ASIR contributions (p < 0.05). Addition of 40 % ASIR or more reduced image noise significantly in both HDCT and SDCT. In HDCT in-stent luminal attenuation was significantly lower and mean measured in-stent luminal diameter was significantly larger (1.2 ± 0.4 mm vs. 0.8 ± 0.4 mm; p < 0.05) compared to SDCT. Radiation dose from HDCT was comparable to SDCT (1.8 ± 0.7 mSv vs. 1.7 ± 0.7 mSv; p = ns). Use of HDCT for coronary stent imaging reduces partial volume artefacts from stents yielding improved image quality versus SDCT at a comparable radiation dose.

Indexed as

Multidetector Computed TomographyRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedStentsAgedArtifactsCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary RestenosisCoronary VesselsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalObserver VariationPercutaneous Coronary Intervention

Identifiers

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.