ArticlePloS one2014
Diagnostic yield of delayed phase imaging in CT angiography of the head and neck: a retrospective study.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carotid Near-Occlusion: A Comprehensive Review, Part 1--Definition, Terminology, and Diagnosis.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2016Pooled it
- Photon-counting detector CT vs energy-integrating detector CT for the diagnosis of arterial dissection in the cervicocerebral region: A single-center case series.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Computed Tomography Angiography in the Diagnosis of Subclavian-Vertebral Artery Steal.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Recognizing subtle near-occlusion in carotid stenosis patients: a computed tomography angiographic study.Neuroradiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate how often delayed images, obtained during neurovascular CTA, provide unique information relative to early phase imaging alone. MATERIALS AND
methodsInformed consent was waived by the institutional review body for this study. Neurovascular CTAs from January through June 2009 were searched to identify those with delayed phase imaging. Reports were reviewed to identify cases where delayed images provided potentially unique information. The studies with potentially unique information were re-interpreted to determine if the information was indeed unique.
results645 CTAs with delayed phase imaging were identified. There were 324 men and 310 women (median age 67 years; range 20-96 years). 59 studies (59/645: 9.1%) had findings on the delayed images. There were 13 cases with hemorrhage, with 4 showing progression on delayed views. Of the remaining 46 cases, 28 had occlusion of a vessel that did not reconstitute on the delayed images, 6 had occlusion of a vessel that did reconstitute on the delayed images, 7 had a string sign which was unchanged on the delayed views and 5 had no abnormal findings. Thus in 10 cases the findings were unique to the delayed images (10/645: 1.55%). Four showed active bleeding, three showed proximal occlusion with distal internal carotid filling from ophthalmic collaterals, two showed pial vessels filling distal to proximal MCA occlusion, and one showed retrograde vertebral artery filling due to subclavian steal. 95% confidence limits of the expected incidence of unique information from the delayed phase images are 0.6%-2.5%.
conclusionObtaining delayed phase imaging for neurovascular CTA should be an active decision and not the default protocol. This avoids imaging with little, if any value. If delayed images had not been obtained in our cohort, no detriment in patient management would have occurred.
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.