Trial reportEuropean radiology2015
Suction/Inspiration against resistance or standardized Mueller maneuver : a new breathing technique to improve contrast density within the pulmonary artery: a pilot CT study.
Trial report in European radiology, 2015. 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.
- Influence of device-assisted suction against resistance (Mueller maneuver) on image quality in CTPA for suspected lung embolism.European radiology · 2023Trial
- Improving Contrast Enhancement in Pulmonary CTA: The value of breathing maneuvers.European journal of radiology open · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur aim was to prospectively investigate whether the recently introduced suction/inspiration against resistance breathing method leads to higher computed tomography (CT) contrast density in the pulmonary artery compared to standard breathing. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe present study was approved by the Medical Ethics committee and all subjects gave written informed consent. Fifteen patients, each without suspicious lung emboli, were randomly assigned to four different groups with different breathing maneuvers (suction against resistance, Valsalva, inspiration, expiration) during routine CT. Contrast enhancement in the central and peripheral sections of the pulmonary artery were measured and compared with one another.
resultsPeripheral enhancement during suction yielded increased mean densities of 138.14 Hounsfield units (HU) (p = 0.001), compared to Valsalva and a mean density of 67.97 HU superior to inspiration (p = 0.075). Finally, suction in comparison to expiration resulted in a mean increase of 30.51 HU (p = 0.42). Central parts of pulmonary arteries presented significantly increased enhancement values (95.74 HU) for suction versus the Valsalva technique (p = 0.020), while all other mean densities were in favour of suction (versus inspiration: p = 0.201; versus expiration: p = 0.790) without reaching significance.
conclusionSuction/Inspiration against resistance is a promising technique to improve contrast density within pulmonary vessels, especially in the peripheral parts, in comparison to other breathing maneuvers. KEY POINTS: • Suction/Inspiration against resistance is promising to improve contrast density within the pulmonary artery. • Patients potentially suffering pulmonary embolism are able to follow suction/inspiration against resistance. • Contrast density after suction is superior in comparison to other breathing maneuvers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26032878What 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.