Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30220595›Full record

ArticleClinical radiology2018

Assessment of automated cone-beam CT vessel identification software during transarterial hepatic embolisation: radiation dose, contrast medium volume, processing time, and operator perspectives compared to digital subtraction angiography.

J C Durack, K T Brown, G Avignon, L A Brody, C T Sofocleous, J P Erinjeri, S B Solomon

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J C DurackInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA. Electronic address: durackj@mskcc.org.
K T BrownInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
G AvignonGE Healthcare, 283 Rue de la Minière, 78533 Buc, France.
L A BrodyInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
C T SofocleousInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
J P ErinjeriInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
S B SolomonInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Elisa de Stanchina · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate arterial cone-beam computed tomography (A-CBCT) automated analysis software for identification of vessels supplying tumours during transarterial hepatic embolisation (TAE). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study was approved by the institutional review board, with waiver of consent. Consecutive TAE procedures using arterial mapping software (AMS), and performed between February 2014 and August 2014, were reviewed. Hepatic arteries were imaged using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as well as A-CBCT processed with AMS. Interventional radiologists reported

resultsThirty of 34 consecutive procedures were evaluated retrospectively. At least one additional embolisation target vessel was identified using AMS in 13 procedures (43%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 26-61%) and embolisation plan modified in 11 (37%, 95% CI: 19-54%). Radiologists reported AMS increased operator confidence and reduced the number of DSA acquisitions in 25 (83%, 95% CI: 70-97%) and 15 cases (50%, 95% CI: 32-68%), respectively. The average A-CBCT acquisition and processing time was 4 minutes 53 seconds and 3 minutes 45 seconds, respectively. A-CBCT contributed to 11% of the radiation dose and 18% of the contrast media volume.

conclusionPhysicians report increased tumour supplying vessel detection and intraprocedural confidence using AMS during TAE without substantial impact on radiation dose, contrast media volume, and procedure time.

Indexed as

Angiography, Digital SubtractionCone-Beam Computed TomographyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChemoembolization, TherapeuticFemaleHumansLiverLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRadiation ExposureRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30220595
PMCPMC6239952
OpenAlexW2891297465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.