Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28092496›Full record

ArticleRadiology2017

The Effect of Contrast Material on Radiation Dose at CT: Part I. Incorporation of Contrast Material Dynamics in Anthropomorphic Phantoms.

Pooyan Sahbaee, W Paul Segars, Daniele Marin, Rendon C Nelson, Ehsan Samei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 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. Virtual clinical trials in medical imaging: a review.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pooyan SahbaeeFrom the Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories (P.S., W.P.S., E.S.) and Departments of Radiology (P.S., D.M., R.C.N., E.S.), Medical Physics Graduate Program (W.P.S., E.S.), and Biomedical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Physics (E.S.), Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Rd, Suite 302, Durham, NC 27705; and Department of Physics, NC State University, Raleigh, NC (P.S.).
W Paul SegarsFrom the Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories (P.S., W.P.S., E.S.) and Departments of Radiology (P.S., D.M., R.C.N., E.S.), Medical Physics Graduate Program (W.P.S., E.S.), and Biomedical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Physics (E.S.), Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Rd, Suite 302, Durham, NC 27705; and Department of Physics, NC State University, Raleigh, NC (P.S.).
Daniele MarinFrom the Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories (P.S., W.P.S., E.S.) and Departments of Radiology (P.S., D.M., R.C.N., E.S.), Medical Physics Graduate Program (W.P.S., E.S.), and Biomedical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Physics (E.S.), Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Rd, Suite 302, Durham, NC 27705; and Department of Physics, NC State University, Raleigh, NC (P.S.).
Rendon C NelsonFrom the Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories (P.S., W.P.S., E.S.) and Departments of Radiology (P.S., D.M., R.C.N., E.S.), Medical Physics Graduate Program (W.P.S., E.S.), and Biomedical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Physics (E.S.), Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Rd, Suite 302, Durham, NC 27705; and Department of Physics, NC State University, Raleigh, NC (P.S.).
Ehsan SameiFrom the Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories (P.S., W.P.S., E.S.) and Departments of Radiology (P.S., D.M., R.C.N., E.S.), Medical Physics Graduate Program (W.P.S., E.S.), and Biomedical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Physics (E.S.), Duke University Medical Center, 2424 Erwin Rd, Suite 302, Durham, NC 27705; and Department of Physics, NC State University, Raleigh, NC (P.S.).

Funding

Simulation Tools for Dynamic CTR01EB001838 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SAMEI, EHSAN, SEGARS, WILLIAM P · 2005 to 2023
$6.9M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose To develop a method to incorporate the propagation of contrast material into computational anthropomorphic phantoms for estimation of organ dose at computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods A patient-specific physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of the human cardiovascular system was incorporated into 58 extended cardiac-torso (XCAT) patient phantoms. The PBPK model comprised compartmental models of vessels and organs unique to each XCAT model. For typical injection protocols, the dynamics of the contrast material in the body were described according to a series of patient-specific iodine mass-balance differential equations, the solutions to which provided the contrast material concentration time curves for each compartment. Each organ was assigned to a corresponding time-varying iodinated contrast agent to create the contrast material-enhanced five-dimensional XCAT models, in which the fifth dimension represents the dynamics of contrast material. To validate the accuracy of the models, simulated aortic and hepatic contrast-enhancement results throughout the models were compared with previously published clinical data by using the percentage of discrepancy in the mean, time to 90% peak, peak value, and slope of enhancement in a paired t test at the 95% significance level. Results The PBPK model allowed effective prediction of the time-varying concentration curves of various contrast material administrations in each organ for different patient models. The contrast-enhancement results were in agreement with results of previously published clinical data, with mean percentage, time to 90% peak, peak value, and slope of less than 10% (P > .74), 4%, 7%, and 14% for uniphasic and 12% (P > .56), 4%, 12%, and 14% for biphasic injection protocols, respectively. The exception was hepatic enhancement results calculated for a uniphasic injection protocol for which the discrepancy was less than 25%. Conclusion A technique to model the propagation of contrast material in XCAT human models was developed. The models with added contrast material propagation can be applied to simulate contrast-enhanced CT examinations.

Indexed as

Phantoms, ImagingRadiation DosageContrast MediaModels, BiologicalTomography, X-Ray ComputedContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID28092496
PMCPMC5452884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.