Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26346458›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurointerventional surgery2016

Metal artifact reduction for flat panel detector intravenous CT angiography in patients with intracranial metallic implants after endovascular and surgical treatment.

Rastislav Pjontek, Belgin Önenköprülü, Bernhard Scholz, Yiannis Kyriakou, Gerrit A Schubert, Omid Nikoubashman, Ahmed Othman, Martin Wiesmann, Marc A Brockmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurointerventional surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

9 authors.

Rastislav PjontekDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Belgin ÖnenköprülüDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Bernhard ScholzHealthcare, Imaging & Therapy Division, Siemens AG, Forchheim, Germany.
Yiannis KyriakouHealthcare, Imaging & Therapy Division, Siemens AG, Forchheim, Germany.
Gerrit A SchubertDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Omid NikoubashmanDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, Medical Imaging Physics, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2055-4217
Ahmed OthmanDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Martin WiesmannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Marc A BrockmannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFlat panel detector CT angiography with intravenous contrast agent injection (IV CTA) allows high-resolution imaging of cerebrovascular structures. Artifacts caused by metallic implants like platinum coils or clips lead to degradation of image quality and are a significant problem.

objectiveTo evaluate the influence of a prototype metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm on image quality in patients with intracranial metallic implants.

methodsFlat panel detector CT after intravenous application of 80 mL contrast agent was performed with an angiography system (Artis zee; Siemens, Forchheim, Germany) using a 20 s rotation protocol (200° rotation angle, 20 s acquisition time, 496 projections). The data before and after MAR of 26 patients with a total of 34 implants (coils, clips, stents) were independently evaluated by two blinded neuroradiologists.

resultsMAR improved the assessability of the brain parenchyma and small vessels (diameter <1 mm) in the neighborhood of metallic implants and at a distance of 6 cm (p<0.001 each, Wilcoxon test). Furthermore, MAR significantly improved the assessability of parent vessel patency and potential aneurysm remnants (p<0.005 each, McNemar test). MAR, however, did not improve assessability of stented vessels.

conclusionsWhen an intravenous contrast protocol is used, MAR significantly ameliorates the assessability of brain parenchyma, vessels, and treated aneurysms in patients with intracranial coils or clips.

Indexed as

ArtifactsProstheses and ImplantsStentsAlgorithmsBrainCerebral AngiographyCerebral ArteriesCerebral VeinsComputed Tomography AngiographyContrast MediaData DisplayHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedIntracranial AneurysmMetalsSurgical InstrumentsContrast MediaMetalsCTCT AngiographyTechnology

Identifiers

PMID26346458
PMCPMC4975832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.