ArticleEuropean journal of radiology2019
Comparison of image quality between split-filter twin beam dual energy and single energy images in abdominal CT.
Article in European journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Dual-Energy CBCT With Reduced Scatter and Cone Beam Artifacts Using an X-Ray Source Array and Interlaced Spectral Filters.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- Dual-Energy CT as a Well-Established CT Modality to Reduce Contrast Media Amount: A Systematic Review from the Computed Tomography Subspecialty Section of the Italian Society of Radiology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Low-cost dual-energy CBCT by spectral filtration of a dual focal spot X-ray source.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Pros and Cons of Dual-Energy CT Systems: "One Does Not Fit All".Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
- Learning-based synthetic dual energy CT imaging from single energy CT for stopping power ratio calculation in proton radiation therapy.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Feasibility of dual-energy CBCT by spectral filtration of a dual-focus CNT x-ray source.PloS one · 2022Article
- Building a dual-energy CT service line in abdominal radiology.European radiology · 2021Review
- Letter to the Editor regarding "Comparison of image quality between split-filter twin beam dual energy and single energy images in abdominal CT".European radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the objective and subjective image quality between composed images from split-filter twin beam dual energy (TBDE) and single-energy computed tomography (SECT) in abdominal CT.
methodsIn this prospective study, 103 patients were imaged using TBDE (n = 51) or SECT (n = 52). The CT number and noise were measured for the following six abdominal structures: liver, spleen, fat, muscle, aorta and portal vein. The normalised noise level for the liver was separately measured and compared. The consistency of the SNR and CT number was compared between the two groups. The subjective image quality was evaluated using six aspects in a blinded manner. Cohen's Kappa statistic was used to determine the level of agreement between the two radiologists.
resultsFor the objective image quality comparison, the SNR of all structures was higher using TBDE compared to SECT (p < 0.05). The CT value for different structures were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). Among all patient sizes, the noise level for TBDE images was significantly lower (7-17% reduction) compared to the SECT images (p < 0.01). Furthermore, noise reduction's magnitude increases with body size. For image quality's subjective evaluation, TBDE images are superior for certain aspects. Cohen's Kappa values (0.7634-0.8460) suggest an adequate level of agreement between the two observers.
conclusionsTBDE scan mode can yield similar or even better objective and subjective image quality at the same level of radiation than conventional SECT. Quantitatively, TBDE images have a 7-17% reduction in noise, depending on the size of the scanned body regions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31648102What 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.