Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31974689›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2020

Comparison of propagation-based CT using synchrotron radiation and conventional cone-beam CT for breast imaging.

Seyedamir Tavakoli Taba, Patrycja Baran, Yakov I Nesterets, Serena Pacile, Susanne Wienbeck, Christian Dullin, Konstantin Pavlov, Anton Maksimenko, Darren Lockie, Sheridan C Mayo and 7 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Seyedamir Tavakoli TabaThe University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia. amir.tavakoli@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8759-0063
Patrycja BaranThe University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
Yakov I NesteretsCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.
Serena PacileElettra - Sincrotrone, Basovizza, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Susanne WienbeckUniversity Medical Center Goettingen, 37075, Gottingen, Lower Saxony, Germany.
Christian DullinElettra - Sincrotrone, Basovizza, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Konstantin PavlovUniversity of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, 2351, Australia.
Anton MaksimenkoAustralian Synchrotron, ANSTO, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.
Darren LockieMaroondah BreastScreen, EasternHealth, Ringwood, Victoria, 3135, Australia.
Sheridan C MayoCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.
Harry M QuineyThe University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
Diego DreossiElettra - Sincrotrone, Basovizza, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Fulvia ArfelliUniversity of Trieste and INFN, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Giuliana TrombaElettra - Sincrotrone, Basovizza, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Sarah LewisThe University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Timur E GureyevThe University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Patrick C BrennanThe University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1138283
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate and compare the image quality of propagation-based phase-contrast computed tomography (PB-CT) using synchrotron radiation and conventional cone-beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) based on various radiological image quality criteria.

methodsEight excised breast tissue samples of various sizes and containing different lesion types were scanned using PB-CT at a synchrotron facility and using CBBCT at a university-affiliated breast imaging centre. PB-CT scans were performed at two different mean glandular dose (MGD) levels: standard (5.8 mGy) and low (1.5 mGy), for comparison with CBBCT scans at the standard MGD (5.8 mGy). Image quality assessment was carried out using six quality criteria and six independent medical imaging experts in a reading room with mammography workstations. The interobserver agreement between readers was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and image quality was compared between the two breast imaging modalities using the area under the visual grading characteristic curve (AUC

resultsInterobserver agreement between the readers showed moderate reliability for five image criteria (ICC: ranging from 0.488 to 0.633) and low reliability for one criterion (image noise) (ICC 0.307). For five image quality criteria (overall quality, perceptible contrast, lesion sharpness, normal tissue interfaces, and calcification visibility), both standard-dose PB-CT images (AUC

conclusionsSynchrotron-based PB-CT can achieve a significantly higher radiological image quality at a substantially lower radiation dose compared with conventional CBBCT. KEY POINTS: • PB-CT using synchrotron radiation results in higher image quality than conventional CBBCT for breast imaging. • PB-CT using synchrotron radiation requires a lower radiation dose than conventional CBBCT for breast imaging. • PB-CT can help clinicians diagnose patients with breast cancer.

Indexed as

SynchrotronsBreastBreast DiseasesCone-Beam Computed TomographyFemaleHumansMammographyRadiation DosageReproducibility of ResultsBreastCone-beam computed tomographyMammographySynchrotronsTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.