ArticlePediatric cardiology2018
Two-Phase Contrast Injection Protocol for Pediatric Cardiac Computed Tomography in Children with Congenital Heart Disease.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduction of radiation exposure and preserved image quality using photon-counting detector cardiac computed tomography without electrocardiographic gating in children with congenital heart disease.European radiology · 2026Article
- Weight-based flow rate triphasic contrast injection protocol for pediatric cardiac computed tomography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Computed Tomography in Infectious Endocarditis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess a two-phase contrast injection protocol for contrast enhancement during cardiac computed tomography (CT) in children with congenital heart disease. Forty-three children (20 boys, 23 girls) of median age 13 months (range 3 days-8.3 years) and weighing ≤ 20 kg who underwent cardiac CT using a two-phase contrast injection protocol at our institution were retrospectively identified. High-pitch spiral third-generation dual-source cardiac CT (tube voltage 70 kV) was performed with a fixed delay of 60 s after contrast injection in the order of 10 mgI/kg/s (30 s), 15 mgI/kg/s (20 s), and a saline chaser (10 s). Attenuation in the inferior vena cava (IVC), superior vena cava (SVC), right atrium (RA), right ventricle (RV), pulmonary artery (PA), left atrium (LA), left ventricle (LV), and descending aorta (AO) was compared using the Steel-Dwass and Fisher's exact tests. The median (interquartile range) attenuation in the IVC, SVC, RA, RV, PA, LA, LV, and AO was 285 (264-347) Hounsfield units (HU), 416 (370-445) HU, 368 (320-388) HU, 373 (322-417) HU, 397 (330-432) HU, 425 (373-469) HU, 435 (385-468) HU, and 437 (392-491) HU, respectively (p < 0.05, IVC vs. the other anatomic sites). There was no significant difference in diagnostic success rate for attenuation > 250 HU between the IVC (41 children, 95.3%) and the other sites (43 children, 100%). A two-phase contrast injection protocol is useful for effective contrast enhancement in pediatric cardiac CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.