Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26892987›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2016

C-Arm Conebeam CT Perfusion Imaging in the Angiographic Suite: A Comparison with Multidetector CT Perfusion Imaging.

K Niu, P Yang, Y Wu, T Struffert, A Doerfler, S Schafer, K Royalty, C Strother, G-H Chen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Angiography suite cone-beam CT perfusion for selection of thrombectomy patients: A pilot study.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

K NiuFrom the Departments of Medical Physics (K.N., Y.W., G.-H.C.).ORCID 0000-0002-6367-1798
P YangRadiology (P.Y., C.S., G.-H.C.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin Department of Neurosurgery (P.Y.), Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6154-3602
Y WuFrom the Departments of Medical Physics (K.N., Y.W., G.-H.C.).ORCID 0000-0002-7669-6919
T StruffertUniversity of Erlangen-Nuremberg (T.S., A.D.), Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8708-597X
A DoerflerUniversity of Erlangen-Nuremberg (T.S., A.D.), Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3076-3231
S SchaferSiemens Medical Solutions USA (S.S., K.R.), Hoffman Estates, Illinois.ORCID 0000-0002-6989-5215
K RoyaltySiemens Medical Solutions USA (S.S., K.R.), Hoffman Estates, Illinois.ORCID 0000-0002-5035-7193
C StrotherRadiology (P.Y., C.S., G.-H.C.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.ORCID 0000-0002-4235-8081
G-H ChenFrom the Departments of Medical Physics (K.N., Y.W., G.-H.C.) Radiology (P.Y., C.S., G.-H.C.), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin gchen7@wisc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2263-1028
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DE

Funding

One Stop Shop Imaging for Acute Ischemic StrokeTreatmentU01EB021183 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CHEN, GUANG-HONG · 2015 to 2020
$3.5M
NIBIB NIH HHS U01 EB021183
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposePerfusion imaging in the angiography suite may provide a way to reduce time from stroke onset to endovascular revascularization of patients with large-vessel occlusion. Our purpose was to compare conebeam CT perfusion with multidetector CT perfusion. MATERIALS AND

methodsData from 7 subjects with both multidetector CT perfusion and conebeam CT perfusion were retrospectively processed and analyzed. Two algorithms were used to enhance temporal resolution and temporal sampling density and reduce the noise of conebeam CT data before generating perfusion maps. Two readers performed qualitative image-quality evaluation on maps by using a 5-point scale. ROIs indicating CBF/CBV abnormalities were drawn. Quantitative analyses were performed by using the Sørensen-Dice coefficients to quantify the similarity of abnormalities. A noninferiority hypothesis was tested to compare conebeam CT perfusion against multidetector CT perfusion.

resultsAverage image-quality scores for multidetector CT perfusion and conebeam CT perfusion images were 2.4 and 2.3, respectively. The average confidence score in diagnosis was 1.4 for both multidetector CT and conebeam CT; the average confidence scores for the presence of a CBV/CBF mismatch were 1.7 (κ = 0.50) and 1.5 (κ = 0.64). For multidetector CT perfusion and conebeam CT perfusion maps, the average scores of confidence in making treatment decisions were 1.4 (κ = 0.79) and 1.3 (κ = 0.90). The area under the visual grading characteristic for the above 4 qualitative quality scores showed an average area under visual grading characteristic of 0.50, with 95% confidence level cover centered at the mean for both readers. The Sørensen-Dice coefficient for CBF maps was 0.81, and for CBV maps, 0.55.

conclusionsAfter postprocessing methods were applied to enhance image quality for conebeam CT perfusion maps, the conebeam CT perfusion maps were not inferior to those generated from multidetector CT perfusion.

Indexed as

AgedAlgorithmsCerebral AngiographyFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleNeuroimagingPerfusion ImagingRetrospective StudiesStrokeTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID26892987
PMCPMC4946984
OpenAlexW2340027277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.