ArticleRadiological physics and technology2019
Additive value of split-bolus single-phase CT scan protocol for preoperative assessment of lung cancer patients referred for video-assisted thoracic surgery.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to assess the additive value of the split-bolus single-phase computed tomography (CT) scan protocol to preoperatively assess patients with lung cancer, who were referred for video-assisted thoracic surgery, when compared to a standard staging CT protocol. We included 160 patients with lung cancer who underwent a split-bolus single-phase CT scan protocol (split-bolus protocol), which can acquire whole-body staging CT and pulmonary artery-vein separation CT angiography (PA-PV CTA) in a single acquisition and 160 patients who underwent whole-body staging CT (standard protocol). We compared the quality of the staging CT images of hepatic parenchyma, portal vein, and hepatic vein between both protocols. We also investigated image quality on PA-PV CTA images in the split-bolus protocol and recorded the number of patients that underwent the 3D PA-PV CTA imaging process. The split-bolus protocol for staging CT images demonstrated a slightly higher enhancement with regard to the hepatic parenchyma (p = 0.007) and hepatic vein (p = 0.006) than the standard protocol. There was no significant difference in the quality of the staging CT images between both protocols (p = 0.067). The mean CT number for the main pulmonary artery and the left atrium for the PA-PV CTA images in the split-bolus protocol were 289.1 HU and 172.8 HU, respectively. Among the images associated with the split-bolus protocol, 98.1% were of appropriate quality for 3D PA-PV CTA imaging. The split-bolus protocol is a dose-efficient protocol to acquire the staging CT and PA-PV CTA images in a single session and provides sufficient image quality for preoperative assessment in patients with lung cancer.
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.