ArticlePloS one2018
Feasibility of radiation dose reduction with iterative reconstruction in abdominopelvic CT for patients with inappropriate arm positioning.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Monte Carlo Modeling of Automatic Exposure Control Vulnerabilities: Patient Positioning and Metallic Artifact Effects on Emergency CAP CT Dose Distribution.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Reconstruction algorithms and arm positioning effects on abdominal CT image quality and radiation dose: a phantom study.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Effect of deep learning reconstruction on arm-induced artifacts compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction and filtered-backprojection in abdominal CT.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Feasibility Study of Dose Modulation for Reducing Radiation Dose with Arms-Down Patient Position in Abdominal Computed Tomography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Detection of fractures of hand and forearm in whole-body CT for suspected polytrauma in intubated patients.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe arms-down position increases computed tomography (CT) radiation dose. Iterative reconstruction (IR) could enhance image quality without increasing radiation dose in patients with arms-down position.
aimTo investigate the feasibility of reduced-dose CT with IR for patients with inappropriate arm positioning.
methodsTwenty patients who underwent two-phase abdominopelvic CT including standard-dose and reduced-dose CT (performed with 80% of the radiation dose of the standard protocol) with their arms positioned in the abdominal area were included in this study. Reduced-dose CT images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP), hybrid IR, and iterative model reconstruction (IMR). These images were compared with standard-dose CT images reconstructed with FBP. Objective image noise in the liver and subcutaneous fat was measured by standard deviation for the quantitative analysis. Then, two radiologists qualitatively assessed beam hardening artifacts, artificial texture, noise, sharpness, and overall image quality in consensus.
resultsReduced-dose CT with all IR levels had lower objective image noise compared to standard-dose CT with FBP reconstruction (P < 0.05). Quantitatively measured beam hardening artifacts were similar in reduced-dose CT with iDose levels 5-6 and fewer with IMR compared to standard-dose CT. In the qualitative analysis, beam hardening artifacts and noise decreased as the IR levels increased. However, artificial texture was significantly aggravated with iDose 5-6 and IMR, and overall image quality significantly worsened with IMR.
conclusionsIR algorithms can reduce beam hardening artifacts in a reduced-dose CT setting in patients with arms-down position, and an intermediate level of hybrid IR allows radiologists to obtain the best image quality. Because the retrospective and single-center nature of our study limited the number of patients, multicenter prospective clinical studies are required to validate our results.
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.