ArticleClinical neuroradiology2019
Low-Dose CCT to Exclude Contraindications to Lumbar Puncture : Benefits and Limitations.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2019. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow-dose cranial computed tomography (LD-CCT) based on iterative reconstruction has been shown to have sufficient image quality to assess cerebrospinal fluid spaces (CSF) and midline structures but not to exclude subtle parenchymal pathologies. Patients without focal neurological deficits often undergo CCT before lumbar puncture (LP) to exclude contraindications to LP including brain herniation or increased CSF pressure. We performed LD-CCT to assess if image quality is appropriate for this indication.
methodsA total of 58 LD-CCT (220 mA/120 kV) of patients before LP were retrospectively evaluated and compared to 79 normal standard dose cranial computed tomography (SD-CCT) (350 mA/120 kV). Iterative reconstruction used for both dose levels was increased by one factor for LD-CCT. We assessed the signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), the dose estimates and scored diagnostic image quality by two raters independently. Significance level was set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe inner and outer CSF spaces except the sulci were equally well depicted by the LD-CCT and SD-CCT; however, depiction of the subtle density differences of the brain parenchyma and the sulci was significantly worse in the LD-CCT (p < 0.0001). The SNR in the gray matter (9.35 vs. 10.61, p < 0.05) and white matter (7.23 vs. 8.15, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in LD-CCT than in SD-CCT with significantly lower dose estimates (1.04 vs. 1.69 mSv, respectively p < 0.0001).
conclusionThe use of LD-CCT with a dose reduction of almost 50% is sufficient to exclude contraindications to LP; however, LD-CCT cannot exclude subtle parenchymal pathologies. Therefore, in patients with suspected parenchymal pathology, SD-CCT is still the method of choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28965126What 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.