ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2020
Image quality of flat-panel computed tomography using 2 different acquisition times versus multidetector computed tomography in whole-head temporal bone specimen.
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of flat-panel volume CT protocols for high-resolution visualization of middle ear anatomy in human skull specimens.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Accelerated flat panel computed tomography for pre-operative temporal bone imaging: Image quality and dosimetry comparison to conventional high resolution multislice computed tomography.Neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Flat panel CT versus multidetector CT in skull base imaging: are there differences in image quality?Head & face medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeImaging of temporal bone and skull base acquire high resolution due to the small anatomic structures with high clinical relevance. The purpose of this study was to compare image quality of the temporal bone in standard 20 s protocol flat-panel computed tomography (FPCT) with the new time- and dose improved 10 s protocol as well as with 128 slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). The aim was to evaluate the new time- and dose improved 10 s protocol.
methods10 whole-skull preparations-20 temporal bones-were scanned with either 128 slice MDCT CT (SOMATOM Definition AS + , Siemens, Erlangen) or FPCT (AXIOM-Artis, Siemens, Erlangen) using 10 s or 20 s protocol.
resultsWe show here that overall FPCT provides significantly better image quality and improved delimitation of clinically relevant structures in the temporal bone compared to 128 slice MDCT. Especially the shorter, dose saving 10 s protocol of the FPCT is still superior to 128 slice MDCT. The 20 s FPCT protocol was only significantly superior in identification of the cochlear apical turn and can thereby be used specifically in clinical cases with pathologies in this area.
conclusionsThe 10 s FPCT protocol yields a significantly better image quality than MDCT in imaging finer structures of the temporal bone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31758306What 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.