Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29255688›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2017

Advances in cardiac CT contrast injection and acquisition protocols.

Jan-Erik Scholtz, Brian Ghoshhajra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Recent technologies in cardiac imaging.Frontiers in medical technology · 2022
    Review
  18. Advances in cardiac CT.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2017
    Article
  19. Aortic valve assessment by cardiac tomography: application in clinical practice.Archivos peruanos de cardiologia y cirugia cardiovascular
    Review
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

2 authors.

Jan-Erik ScholtzCardiac MR PET CT Program, Department of Radiology (Cardiovascular Imaging) and Division of Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Brian GhoshhajraCardiac MR PET CT Program, Department of Radiology (Cardiovascular Imaging) and Division of Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac computed tomography (CT) imaging has become an important part of modern cardiovascular care. Coronary CT angiography (CTA) is the first choice imaging modality for non-invasive visualization of coronary artery stenosis. In addition, cardiac CT does not only provide anatomical evaluation, but also functional and valvular assessment, and myocardial perfusion evaluation. In this article we outline the factors which influence contrast enhancement, give an overview of current contrast injection and acquisition protocols, with focus on current emerging topics such as pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) planning, cardiac CT for congenital heart disease (CHD) patients, and myocardial CT perfusion (CTP). Further, we point out areas where we see potential for future improvements in cardiac CT imaging based on a closer interaction between CT scanner settings and contrast injection protocols to tailor injections to patient- and exam-specific factors.

Indexed as

cardiac computed tomography (CT)Contrast injection protocolcoronary CT angiography (CTA)iodine contrast agent

Identifiers

PMID29255688
PMCPMC5716940

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.