ArticleMedicine2019
Evaluation of the depiction ability of the microanatomy of the temporal bone in quarter-detector CT: Model-based iterative reconstruction vs hybrid iterative reconstruction.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning Reconstruction Specialized for Inner Ear: Improving Image Quality and Anatomical Structure Visualization as Compared with Conventional Hybrid-Type Iterative Reconstruction on High-Definition CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deep learning reconstruction for high-resolution computed tomography images of the temporal bone: comparison with hybrid iterative reconstruction.Neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Preoperative prediction for mastoid extension of middle ear cholesteatoma using temporal subtraction serial HRCT studies.European radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Little is known regarding differences between model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) in temporal bone computed tomography (CT). This study compared the ability to depict microstructures in temporal bone in quarter-detector CT (QDCT) between MBIR and HIR.Sixty-two temporal bones in 31 consecutive adult patients who underwent QDCT were included. Reconstruction was performed with Forward projected model-based Iterative Reconstruction SoluTion (FIRST) BONE mild mode and Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR3D) enhanced mild mode. Imaging quality was graded for 3 microstructures (spiral osseous lamina, tympanic membrane, and singular canal).Spiral osseous lamina was significantly well-delineated in the AIDR3D enhanced group, compared with the FIRST group. In nearly all cases with FIRST, spiral osseous lamina was poorly defined. Although there was no significant difference, depiction of the tympanic membrane and singular canal tended to be better with AIDR3D enhanced mode.Routine reconstruction for preoperative temporal bone CT should be performed with HIR, rather than MBIR.
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.