Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24092045›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2014

Dual energy MDCT assessment of renal lesions: an overview.

Achille Mileto, Daniele Marin, Rendon C Nelson, Giorgio Ascenti, Daniel T Boll

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Quantitative dual-energy CT techniques in the abdomen.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2022
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Dual-energy CT: minimal essentials for radiologists.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

5 authors.

Achille MiletoDepartment of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 27710, USA, achille.mileto@duke.edu.
Daniele Marin
Rendon C Nelson
Giorgio Ascenti
Daniel T Boll

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the expansion of cross-sectional imaging, the number of renal lesions that are incidentally discovered has increased. Multidetector CT (MDCT) is the investigation of choice for characterising and staging renal lesions. Although a definitive diagnosis can be confidently posed for most of them, a number of renal lesions remain indeterminate following MDCT. Further imaging tests are therefore needed, with subsequent increase of healthcare costs, radiation exposure, and patient anxiety. By addressing most of the issues with conventional MDCT imaging, dual-energy MDCT can improve the diagnosis of renal lesions and, potentially, may represent a paradigm shift from a merely attenuation-based to a material-specific spectral imaging investigation. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of current clinical applications of dual-energy CT in the evaluation of renal lesions. Key Points • As MDCT expands, an increasing number of renal lesions are serendipitously discovered. • With conventional MDCT, technical issues affect the diagnosis of renal lesions. • Dual-energy CT addresses some of the drawbacks of conventional MDCT. • Dual-energy CT may represent a paradigm shift for renal lesions imaging.

Indexed as

Diagnosis, DifferentialHumansKidney NeoplasmsMultidetector Computed TomographyNeoplasm StagingRadiography, Dual-Energy Scanned ProjectionReproducibility of Results

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.