Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27200404›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2016

Comparison of organ-specific-radiation dose levels between 70 kVp perfusion CT and standard tri-phasic liver CT in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma using a Monte-Carlo-Simulation-based analysis platform.

J Gawlitza, H Haubenreisser, M Meyer, C Hagelstein, S Sudarski, S O Schoenberg, T Henzler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. An Individualized Contrast-Enhanced Liver Computed Tomography Imaging Protocol Based on Body Mass Index in 126 Patients Seen for Liver Cirrhosis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

J GawlitzaInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
H HaubenreisserInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
M MeyerInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
C HagelsteinInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
S SudarskiInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
S O SchoenbergInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
T HenzlerInstitute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Germany.
University Medical Centre Mannheim · DEHeidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to systematically compare organ-specific-radiation dose levels between a radiation dose optimized perfusion CT (dVPCT) protocol of the liver and a tri-phasic standard CT protocol of the liver using a Monte-Carlo-Simulation-based analysis platform. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The complete CT data of 52 patients (41 males; mean age 65 ± 12) with suspected HCC that underwent dVPCT examinations on a 3rd generation dual-source CT (Somatom Force, Siemens) with a dose optimized tube voltage of 70 kVp or 80 kVp were exported to an analysis platform (Radimetrics, Bayer). The dVPCT studies were matched with a reference group of 50 patients (35 males; mean age 65 ± 14) that underwent standard tri-phasic CT (sCT) examinations of the liver with 130 kVp using the calculated water-equivalent-diameter of the patients. The analysis platform was used for the calculation of the organ-specific effective dose (ED) as well as global radiation-dose parameters (ICRP103).

resultsThe organ-specific ED of the dVPCT protocol was statistically significantly lower when compared to the sCT in 14 of 21, and noninferior in a total of 18 of 21 examined items (all p < 0.05). The EDs of the dVPCT examinations were especially in the dose sensitive organs such as the red marrow (17.3 mSv vs 24.6 mSv, p = < 0.0001) and the liver (33.3 mSv vs 46.9 mSv, p = 0.0003) lower when compared to the sCT.

conclusionOur results suggest that dVPCT performed at 70 or 80 kVp compares favorably to sCT performed with 130 kVp with regard to effective organ dose levels, especially in dose sensitive organs, while providing additional functional information which is of paramount importance in patients undergoing novel targeted therapies.

Indexed as

DoseDynamic volume perfusion CTHepatocellular carcinomaOrgan specificRadiation dose

Identifiers

PMID27200404
PMCPMC4864374
OpenAlexW2345469503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.