ArticleThe British journal of radiology2015
Ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography with high pitch: diagnostic yield of a volumetric planning scan and effects on dose reduction and imaging strategy.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scan Range and Radiation Dose of the Ultra-High-Resolution Series in Pancreatic Photon-Counting Detector CT: A Prospective Two-Group Comparison of an Ultra-Low-Dose Planning Series.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Low-radiation and high image quality coronary computed tomography angiography in "real-world" unselected patients.World journal of radiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the role of an ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography (CTCA) scan with high pitch for delimiting the range of the subsequent standard CTCA scan.
methods30 patients with an indication for CTCA were prospectively examined using a two-scan dual-source CTCA protocol (2.0 × 64.0 × 0.6 mm; pitch, 3.4; rotation time of 280 ms; 100 kV): Scan 1 was acquired with one-fifth of the tube current suggested by the automatic exposure control software [CareDose 4D™ (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) using 100 kV and 370 mAs as a reference] with the scan length from the tracheal bifurcation to the diaphragmatic border. Scan 2 was acquired with standard tube current extending with reduced scan length based on Scan 1. Nine central coronary artery segments were analysed qualitatively on both scans.
resultsScan 2 (105.1 ± 10.1 mm) was significantly shorter than Scan 1 (127.0 ± 8.7 mm). Image quality scores were significantly better for Scan 2. However, in 5 of 6 (83%) patients with stenotic coronary artery disease, a stenosis was already detected in Scan 1 and in 13 of 24 (54%) patients with non-stenotic coronary arteries, a stenosis was already excluded by Scan 1. Using Scan 2 as reference, the positive- and negative-predictive value of Scan 1 was 83% (5 of 6 patients) and 100% (13 of 13 patients), respectively.
conclusionAn ultra-low-dose CTCA planning scan enables a reliable scan length reduction of the following standard CTCA scan and allows for correct diagnosis in a substantial proportion of patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Further dose reductions are possible owing to a change in the individual patient's imaging strategy as a prior ultra-low-dose CTCA scan may already rule out the presence of a stenosis or may lead to a direct transferal to an invasive catheter procedure.
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.