ArticleMedicine2018
The feasibility of 1-stop examination of coronary CT angiography and abdominal enhanced CT.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimal dose CT for left ventricular ejection fraction and combination with chest-abdomen-pelvis CT.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Computed Tomography Techniques, Protocols, Advancements, and Future Directions in Liver Diseases.Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of performing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and abdominal enhanced computed tomography (CT) with 1-time injection of the agent.CCTA images (right coronary artery, left anterior descending coronary artery, and left circumflex coronary artery) were collected from 20 patients who completed a 1-stop combined examination of CCTA and abdominal enhanced CT (group A), 20 patients who only underwent abdominal enhanced CT (group B1), and 20 patients who only underwent CCTA (group B2). These images were interpreted using the 5-point Likert scale system by 2 experienced radiologists, and abdominal images were observed for breathing artifact. CT value, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and CTDI were recorded and compare among the 3 groups.The difference in image quality of the coronary and total volume of the contrast agent between group A and group B1 was not statistical significant (P > .05). The CT value and SNR in group B1 (CCTA) (CT: 394.65 ± 59.23, SNR: 17.38 ± 4.13) increased, compare with Group A (CT: 360.35 ± 34.16, SNR: 13.76 ± 1.84, P = .03, .01), while CTDI was undifferentiated between group A (17.14 ± 6.20) and group B1 (18.38 ± 9.79) (P = .64). The difference in CT value and SNR at the arterial phase and CT value at the venous phase between group A (abdomen) and group B2 were statistically significant, the CTDI in group A (9.09 ± 1.05) increased, compared with group B2 (8.23 ± 1.33) (P = .03), and SNR at the venous phase in group B2 (12.50 ± 2.43) increased, compared with group A (10.89 ± 2.03) (P = .03).Revolution CT can capture full images and very rapidly switch to the scan mode, enabling a 1-stop axial CCTA and enhanced helical abdominal scan. The 1-stop combined scan resulted in a satisfactory image quality, which reduced the contrast agent dose and simplified the workflow.The 1-stop combined scan allows for the high success rate of the examination, reduces the number of examinations, and decreases the dose and risk of injection of the contrast agent. This would be helpful for patients to obtain diagnostic images in time.
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.