Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31172206›Full record

ArticleSkeletal radiology2019

Motion compensation in extremity cone-beam computed tomography.

Alejandro Sisniega, Gaurav K Thawait, Delaram Shakoor, Jeffrey H Siewerdsen, Shadpour Demehri, Wojciech Zbijewski

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Skeletal radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Targeted Deformable Motion Compensation for Vascular Interventional Cone-Beam CT Imaging.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering
    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

6 authors.

Alejandro SisniegaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Gaurav K ThawaitDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Delaram ShakoorRussel H Morgan Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21278, USA.
Jeffrey H SiewerdsenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Shadpour DemehriRussel H Morgan Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21278, USA.
Wojciech ZbijewskiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. wzbijewski@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7593-5394

Funding

Quantitative high resolution cone beam CT for assessment of bone and joint healthR01EB018896 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ZBIJEWSKI, WOJCIECH BARTOSZ · 2014 to 2017
$2.0M
Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center (US) W911QY-14-C-0014NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB018896NIBIB NIH HHS R01-EB-018896
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the improvement in extremity cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image quality in datasets with motion artifact using a motion compensation method based on maximizing image sharpness.

methodsFollowing IRB approval, retrospective analysis of 308 CBCT scans of lower extremities was performed by a fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist to identify images with moderate to severe motion artifact. Twenty-four scans of 22 patients (18 male, four female; mean, 32 years old, range, 21-74 years old) were chosen for inclusion. Sharp (bone) and smooth (soft tissue) reconstructions were processed using the motion compensation algorithm. Two experts rated visualization of trabecular bone, cortical bone, joint spaces, and tendon on a nine-level Likert scale with and without motion compensation (a total of 96 datasets). Visual grading characteristics (VGC) was used to quantitatively determine the difference in image quality following motion compensation. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was obtained to assess inter-observer agreement.

resultsMotion-compensated images exhibited appreciable reduction in artifacts. The observer study demonstrated the associated improvement in diagnostic quality. The fraction of cases receiving scores better than "Fair" increased from less than 10% without compensation to 40-70% following compensation, depending on the task. The area under the VGC curve was 0.75 (tendon) to 0.85 (cortical bone), confirming preference for motion compensated images. ICC values showed excellent agreement between readers before (ICC range, 0.8-0.91) and after motion compensation (ICC range, 0.92-0.97).

conclusionsThe motion compensation algorithm significantly improved the visualization of bone and soft tissue structures in extremity CBCT for cases exhibiting patient motion.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAlgorithmsArtifactsCone-Beam Computed TomographyFemaleHumansLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedMotionRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesExtremity cone-beam CTMotion compensationVisual grading characteristicWeight-bearing

Identifiers

PMID31172206
PMCPMC6814492

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.