Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29808430›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

Comparing dual energy CT and subtraction CT on a phantom: which one provides the best contrast in iodine maps for sub-centimetre details?

Evelinda Baerends, Luuk J Oostveen, Casper T Smit, Marco Das, Ioannis Sechopoulos, Monique Brink, Frank de Lange, Mathias Prokop

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Lung aeration, ventilation, and perfusion imaging.Current opinion in critical care · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Evelinda BaerendsDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Luuk J OostveenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Luuk.Oostveen@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0445-9436
Casper T SmitDepartment of Medical Physics, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Marco DasDepartment of Medical Physics, MUMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Ioannis SechopoulosDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Monique BrinkDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Frank de LangeDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mathias ProkopDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101 (route 766), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLMedisch Spectrum Twente · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) and iodine discrimination thresholds on iodine maps derived from dual energy CT (DECT) and subtraction CT (SCT).

methodsA contrast-detail phantom experiment was performed with 2 to 15 mm diameter tubes containing water or iodinated contrast concentrations ranging from 0.5 mg/mL to 20 mg/mL. DECT scans were acquired at 100 kVp and at 140 kVp+Sn filtration. SCT scans were acquired at 100 kVp. Iodine maps were created by material decomposition (DECT) or by subtraction of water scans from iodine scans (SCT). Matched exposure levels varied from 8 to 15 mGy. Iodine discrimination thresholds (C

resultsThe adjusted mean CNR was 1.9 times higher for SCT than for DECT. Exposure level had no effect on CNR. All observers discriminated all details ≥10 mm at 12 and 15 mGy. For sub-centimetre details, the lowest calculated C

conclusionsSCT results in higher CNR and reduced iodine discrimination thresholds compared to DECT for sub-centimetre details. KEY POINTS: • Subtraction CT iodine maps exhibit higher CNR than dual-energy iodine maps • Lower iodine concentrations can be discriminated for sub-cm details with SCT • Response times are lower using SCT compared to dual-energy CT.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaHumansIodinePhantoms, ImagingRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRadiography, Dual-Energy Scanned ProjectionSignal-To-Noise RatioTomography, X-Ray ComputedContrast MediaIodineContrast MediaIodinePhantoms, ImagingSubtraction techniqueTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID29808430
PMCPMC6223839
OpenAlexW2806128118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.