ArticleEuropean radiology2018
Can We Perform CT of the Appendix with Less Than 1 mSv? A De-escalating Dose-simulation Study.
Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Computed tomography for diagnosis of acute appendicitis in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance and image quality of an image-based denoising algorithm applied to radiation dose-reduced CT in diagnosing acute appendicitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Low-Dose Abdominal CT for Evaluating Suspected Appendicitis: Recommendations for CT Imaging Techniques and Practical Issues.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Low-Dose Abdominal CT for Evaluating Suspected Appendicitis in Adolescents and Young Adults: Review of Evidence.Korean journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Recent technologies in cardiac imaging.Frontiers in medical technology · 2022Review
- Classification of acute appendicitis (CAA): treatment directed new classification based on imaging (ultrasound, computed tomography) and pathology.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Review
- Diagnostic performance and radiation dose of reduced vs. standard scan range abdominopelvic CT for evaluation of appendicitis.European radiology · 2021Article
- Optimization of radiation dose for CT detection of lytic and sclerotic bone lesions: a phantom study.European radiology · 2020Article
- The evolution of image reconstruction for CT-from filtered back projection to artificial intelligence.European radiology · 2019Review
- Prospective evaluation of ultra-low-dose contrast-enhanced 100-kV abdominal computed tomography with tin filter: effect on radiation dose reduction and image quality with a third-generation dual-source CT system.European radiology · 2019Article
- Reliability of standardized reporting system of acute appendicitis in adults at low-dose 320-rows CT.European journal of radiology open · 2019Article
- Low-Dose Computed Tomography for the Optimization of Radiation Dose Exposure in Patients with Crohn's Disease.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically explore the lowest reasonably achievable radiation dose for appendiceal CT using an iterative reconstruction (IR) in young adults.
methodsWe prospectively included 30 patients who underwent 2.0-mSv CT for suspected appendicitis. From the helical projection data, 1.5-, 1.0- and 0.5-mSv CTs were generated using a low-dose simulation tool and the knowledge-based IR. We performed step-wise non-inferiority tests sequentially comparing 2.0-mSv CT with each of 1.5-, 1.0- and 0.5-mSv CT, with a predetermined non-inferiority margin of 0.06. The primary end point was the pooled area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) for three abdominal and three non-abdominal radiologists.
resultsFor the abdominal radiologists, the non-inferiorities of 1.5-, 1.0- and 0.5-mSv CT to 2.0-mSv CT were sequentially accepted [pooled AUC difference: 2.0 vs. 0.5 mSv, 0.017 (95% CI: -0.016, 0.050)]. For the non-abdominal radiologists, the non-inferiorities of 1.5- and 1.0-mSv CT were accepted; however, the non-inferiority of 0.5-mSv CT could not be proved [pooled AUC difference: 2.0 vs. 1.0 mSv, -0.017 (-0.070, 0.035) and 2.0 vs. 0.5 mSv, 0.045 (-0.071, 0.161)].
conclusionThe 1.0-mSv appendiceal CT was non-inferior to 2.0-mSv CT in terms of diagnostic performance for both abdominal and non-abdominal radiologists; 0.5-mSv appendiceal CT was non-inferior only for abdominal radiologists. KEY POINTS: • For both abdominal and non-abdominal radiologists, 1.0-mSv appendiceal CT could be feasible. • The 0.5-mSv CT was non-inferior to 2.0-mSv CT only for expert abdominal radiologists. • Reader experience is an important factor affecting diagnostic impairment by low-dose CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29218613What 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.