ArticlePloS one2019
Metal implants influence CT scan parameters leading to increased local radiation exposure: A proposal for correction techniques.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementing tin-prefiltration in routine clinical CT scans of the lower extremity: impact on radiation dose.Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
- Cancer-Associated Cachexia: Bridging Clinical Findings with Mechanistic Insights in Human Studies.Cancer discovery · 2025Review
- Improved visualization of the bone-implant interface and osseointegration in ex vivo acetabular cup implants using photon-counting detector CT.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
- Clinical Effectiveness of Home-Based Telerehabilitation Program for Geriatric Hip Fracture Following Total Hip Replacement.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- Radiation impacts on toxicity of cobalt-chromium (CoCr) implant debris.Nanotoxicology · 2023Article
- Computed Tomography in Limb Salvage and Deformity Correction-3D Assessment, Indications, Radiation Exposure, and Safety Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metal implants not only deteriorate image quality, but also increase radiation exposure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of metal hip prosthesis on absorbed radiation dose and assess the efficacy of organ dose modulation (ODM) and metal artifact reduction (MAR) protocols on dose reduction. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned with and without bilateral metal hip prostheses, and surface and deep level radiation doses were measured at the abdomen and pelvis. Finally, the absorbed radiation doses at pelvic and abdominal cavities in the reference, ODM, and two MAR scans (Gemstone spectral imaging, GE) were compared. The Mann Whitney-U test and Kruskal-Wallis test were performed to compare the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and mean absorbed radiation doses. Unilateral and bilateral metal hip prostheses increased CTDIVOL by 14.4% and 30.5%, respectively. MAR protocols decreased absorbed radiation doses in the pelvis. MAR showed the most significant dose reduction in the deep pelvic cavity followed by ODM. However, MAR protocols increased absorbed radiation doses in the upper abdomen. ODM significantly reduced absorbed radiation in the pelvis and abdomen. In conclusion, metal hip implants increased radiation doses in abdominopelvic CT scans. MAR and ODM techniques reduced absorbed radiation dose in abdominopelvic CT scans with metal hip prostheses.
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.