Trial reportPloS one2013
128-slice acceletated-pitch dual energy CT angiography of the head and neck: comparison of different low contrast medium volumes.
Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Head and neck angiography at 70 kVp with a third-generation dual-source CT system in patients: comparison with 100 kVp.Neuroradiology · 2017Trial
- Application of low injection rate and low contrast agent dose in three-dimensional rotational digital subtraction angiography of the intracranial aneurysm.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2016Trial
- Dual-energy computed tomography of the neck-optimizing tube current settings and radiation dose using a 3D-printed patient phantom.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur study aims to evaluate the image quality and feasibility of 128-slice dual-energy CTA (DE-CTA) for supra-aortic arteries using reduced amounts of contrast medium (CM).
methodsA prospective study was performed in 54 patients receiving CTA of the head and neck with a 128-slice dual-source CT system. Patients were randomized into two groups with a volume of either 40 mL of CM (Group I) or 50 mL of CM (Group II). Arterial and venous enhancements were recorded for quantitative assessment. Qualitative assessments for images without bone removal (BR) were based on a) the visualization of the circle of Willis and b) streak artifacts due to residual CM in the subclavian or internal jugular veins ipsilateral to injection of CM. Qualitative assessment of dual-energy images using BR was based on the presence of bone remnants and vessel integrity. Quantitative data was compared using the Student t test. The χ(2) test was used for the qualitative measurements of streak artifacts in veins while the Mann-Whitney U test was used for the qualitative measurements of images with BR.
resultsArterial and venous attenuation was significantly higher in Group II (P=0.000). Image quality regarding the circle of Willis was excellent in both groups (3.90±0.30 for Group I and 4.00±0 for Group II) . Imaging of the internal jugular veins was scored higher in Group I (1.87±0.72) compared with Group II (1.48±0.51) (P=0.021). Within Group I using BR, mean scores for bone remnants did not differ significantly (P>0.05) but mean scores of vessel integrity (P<0.05) did.
conclusionsContrast-enhanced head and neck CTA is feasible using a scan protocol with low amounts of contrast medium (40 mL) on a 128-slice dual-energy CTA. The 40-mL protocol provides satisfactory image quality before and after dual-energy bone-removal post-processing.
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.