ArticleMedicine2019
Evaluation of three-dimensional iterative image reconstruction in C-arm-based interventional cone-beam CT: A phantom study in comparison with customary reconstruction technique.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three-dimensional laser combined with C-arm computed tomography-assisted puncture of intracerebral hemorrhage.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Noise reduction profile: A new method for evaluation of noise reduction techniques in CT.Medical physics · 2022Article
- [Applications of cone beam computed tomography of the craneofacial structure in medical specialties. A review].Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared images obtained using a three-dimensional iterative image reconstruction (3D-IIR) algorithm for C-arm-based interventional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with that using the customary reconstruction technique to quantify the effect of reconstruction techniques on image quality.We scanned 2 phantoms using an angiography unit with digital flat-panel system-an elliptical cylinder acrylic phantom to evaluate spatial resolution and a Catphan phantom to evaluate CT number linearity, image noise, and low-contrast resolution. Three-dimensional imaging was calculated using Feldkamp algorithms, and additional image sets were reconstructed using 3D-IIR at 5 settings (Sharp, Default, Soft+, Soft++, Soft+++). We evaluated quality of images obtained using the 6 reconstruction techniques and analyzed variance to test values of the 10% value of each MTF, mean CT number, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), with P < .05 considered statistically significant.Modulation transfer function curves and CT number linearity among images obtained using the customary technique and the 5 3D-IIR techniques showed excellent agreement. Noise power spectrum curves demonstrated uniform noise reduction across the spatial frequency in the iterative reconstruction, and CNR obtained using all but the Sharp 3D-IIR technique was significantly better than that using the customary reconstruction technique (Sharp, P = .1957; Default, P = .0042; others, P < .0001). Use of 3D-IIR, especially the Soft++ and Soft+++ settings, improved visualization of low-contrast targets.Use of a 3D-IIR can significantly improve image noise and low-contrast resolution while maintaining spatial resolution in C-arm-based interventional CBCT, yielding higher quality images that may increase safety and efficacy in interventional radiology.
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.