Observational studyMedicine2019
Ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography for interstitial lung disease using model-based iterative reconstruction with or without the lung setting.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05391100 (Screening of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis for Interstitial Lung Disease With Radiographic and Labor Methods), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Screening of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis for Interstitial Lung Disease With Radiographic and Labor Methods
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Lung Changes in Long COVID: Ultra-Low-Dose vs. Standard-Dose CT Chest.British journal of biomedical science · 2024Article
- Diagnosis and monitoring of systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease using high-resolution computed tomography.Journal of scleroderma and related disorders · 2022Review
- Management of Connective Tissue Disease-related Interstitial Lung Disease.Current pulmonology reports · 2022Review
- Interstitial Lung Abnormalities: State of the Art.Radiology · 2021Review
- Image quality of ultralow-dose chest CT using deep learning techniques: potential superiority of vendor-agnostic post-processing over vendor-specific techniques.European radiology · 2021Article
- Novelties in Imaging of Thoracic Sarcoidosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- The fibrosis puzzle of systemic sclerosis-associated ILD and the quest for targeted interventions.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the effects of reconstruction on the image quality and quantitative analysis for interstitial lung disease (ILD) using filtered back projection (FBP) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) with the lung setting and the conventional setting on ultra-low-dose computed tomography (CT).Fifty-two patients with known ILD were prospectively enrolled and underwent CT at an ultra-low dose (0.18 ± 0.02 mSv) and a standard dose (7.01 ± 2.66 mSv). Ultra-low-dose CT was reconstructed using FBP (uFBP) and MBIR with the lung setting (uMBIR-Lung) and the conventional setting (uMBIR-Stnd). Standard-dose CT was reconstructed using FBP (sFBP). Three radiologists subjectively evaluated the images on a 3-point scale (1 = worst, 3 = best). For objective image quality analysis, regions of interest were placed in the lung parenchyma and the axillary fat, and standard deviation (SD), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were evaluated. For 32 patients with clinically diagnosed idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, quantitative measurements including total lung volume (TLV) and the percentage of ILD volume (%ILDV) were obtained. The medians of 3 radiologists' scores were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the objective noise was analyzed using the paired t test. The Bonferroni correction was used for multiple comparisons. The quantitative measurements were analyzed using the Bland-Altman method.uMBIR-Lung scored better than uMBIR-Stnd and worse than sFBP (P < .001), except for noise and streak artifact in subjective analysis. The SD decreased significantly in the order of uMBIR-Stnd, uMBIR-Lung, sFBP, and uFBP (P < .001). The SNR and CNR increased significantly in the order of uMBIR-Stnd, uMBIR-Lung, sFBP, and uFBP (P < .001). For TLV, there was no significant bias between ultra-low-dose MBIRs and sFBP (P > .3). For %ILDV, there was no significant bias between uMBIR-Lung and sFBP (p = 0.8), but uMBIR-Stnd showed significantly lower %ILDV than sFBP (P = .013).uMBIR-Lung provided more appropriate image quality than uMBIR-Stnd. Although inferior to standard-dose CT for image quality, uMBIR-Lung showed equivalent CT quantitative measurements to standard-dose CT.
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.