ArticleRadiological physics and technology2017
Optimal injection method for long-range computed tomography angiography.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to obtain high-stable computed tomography (CT) values for CT angiography (CTA). We verified the optimal use of the new protocol for long-range scanning using a contrast material flow phantom (Ichikawa, CT imaging theory. Igaku syoin Publishing, Tokyo, 8; Awai et al., Am J Roentgenol 186(2):379-385, 1) to obtain high-stable CT values (Fig. 2). We have developed a novel contrast injection method called the stable line imaging protocol (SLIP). This method involved a gradual reduction in the rate of administration of the contrast medium, which was accompanied by simultaneous administration of saline to compensate for the resultant decrease in the rate of administration. A saline flush was further added after the contrast medium injection. The rate of administration of the saline flush was the same as that of the initial contrast medium. We injected a contrast medium from the injector into the flow phantom. The time-enhancement curve (TEC) data were obtained five times by changing the injection method, and the average CT values were determined. The maximum simulation of the aortic peak enhancement of TEC was defined as pTEC. The time required to keep the CT value more than 80% of the pTEC was defined as the time period of contrast enhancement (p80). The pTEC of a single injection was 295.7 ± 5.3 HU, while that of SLIP was 296.5 ± 2.3 HU; the two values did not differ significantly. The p80 of a single injection was 19.1 ± 0.2 s, while that of SLIP was 23.2 ± 0.4 s; p80 of SLIP was 18% longer than that of the single injection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28573550What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.