Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28289943›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2017

Intra-patient comparison of reduced-dose model-based iterative reconstruction with standard-dose adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in the CT diagnosis and follow-up of urolithiasis.

Sean Tenant, Chun Lap Pang, Prageeth Dissanayake, Varut Vardhanabhuti, Colin Stuckey, Catherine Gutteridge, Christopher Hyde, Carl Roobottom

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2017. 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
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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

8 authors.

Sean TenantPeninsula Radiology Academy, William Prance Rd, Plymouth, PL6 5WR, UK. sean.tenant@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4005-4663
Chun Lap PangPeninsula Radiology Academy, William Prance Rd, Plymouth, PL6 5WR, UK.
Prageeth DissanayakePeninsula Radiology Academy, William Prance Rd, Plymouth, PL6 5WR, UK.
Varut VardhanabhutiPlymouth University Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry, John Bull Building, Plymouth, PL6 8BU, UK.
Colin StuckeyPlymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Rd, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK.
Catherine GutteridgePlymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Rd, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK.
Christopher HydeUniversity of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Carl RoobottomPlymouth University Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry, John Bull Building, Plymouth, PL6 8BU, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the accuracy of reduced-dose CT scans reconstructed using a new generation of model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) in the imaging of urinary tract stone disease, compared with a standard-dose CT using 30% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction.

methodsThis single-institution prospective study recruited 125 patients presenting either with acute renal colic or for follow-up of known urinary tract stones. They underwent two immediately consecutive scans, one at standard dose settings and one at the lowest dose (highest noise index) the scanner would allow. The reduced-dose scans were reconstructed using both ASIR 30% and MBIR algorithms and reviewed independently by two radiologists. Objective and subjective image quality measures as well as diagnostic data were obtained.

resultsThe reduced-dose MBIR scan was 100% concordant with the reference standard for the assessment of ureteric stones. It was extremely accurate at identifying calculi of 3 mm and above. The algorithm allowed a dose reduction of 58% without any loss of scan quality.

conclusionsA reduced-dose CT scan using MBIR is accurate in acute imaging for renal colic symptoms and for urolithiasis follow-up and allows a significant reduction in dose. KEY POINTS: • MBIR allows reduced CT dose with similar diagnostic accuracy • MBIR outperforms ASIR when used for the reconstruction of reduced-dose scans • MBIR can be used to accurately assess stones 3 mm and above.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsRadiation DosageAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRenal ColicReproducibility of ResultsTomography, X-Ray ComputedComputed tomographyKidneyRadiation dosageRenal colicUrolithiasis

Identifiers

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.