ArticleWorld journal of urology2020
Substantial radiation dose reduction with consistent image quality using a novel low-dose stone composition protocol.
Article in World journal of urology, 2020. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photon-counting CT in cancer radiotherapy: technological advances and clinical benefits.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Optimal dual-energy computed tomography scan parameters to detect small-sized urinary stones and their composition.Urolithiasis · 2023Article
- Influence of a Deep Learning Noise Reduction on the CT Values, Image Noise and Characterization of Kidney and Ureter Stones.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical Low Dose Photon Counting CT for the Detection of Urolithiasis: Evaluation of Image Quality and Radiation Dose.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
- Low-dose dual-energy CT for stone characterization: a systematic comparison of two generations of split-filter single-source and dual-source dual-energy CT.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2021Article
- Dual-Energy CT for Urinary Stone Evaluation.Current urology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess a novel low-dose CT-protocol, combining a 150 kV spectral filtration unenhanced protocol (Sn150 kVp) and a stone-targeted dual-energy CT (DECT) in patients with urolithiasis.
methods232 (151 male, 49 ± 16.4 years) patients with urolithiasis received a low-dose non-contrast enhanced CT (NCCT) for suspected urinary stones either on a third-generation dual-source CT system (DSCT) using Sn150 kVp (n = 116, group 1), or on a second-generation DSCT (n = 116 group 2) using single energy (SE) 120 kVp. For group 1, a subsequent dual-energy CT (DECT) with a short stone-targeted scan range was performed. Objective and subjective image qualities were assessed. Radiation metrics were compared.
results534 stones (group 1: n = 242 stones; group 2: n = 292 stones) were found. In group 1, all 215 stones within the stone-targeted DECT-scan range were identified. DE analysis was able to distinguish between UA and non-UA calculi in all collected stones. 11 calculi (5.12%) were labeled as uric acid (UA) while 204 (94.88%) were labeled as non-UA calculi. There was no significant difference in overall Signal-to-noise-ratio between group 1 and group 2 (p = 0.819). On subjective analysis both protocols achieved a median Likert rating of 2 (p = 0.171). Mean effective dose was significantly lower for combined Sn150 kVp and stone-targeted DECT (3.34 ± 1.84 mSv) compared to single energy 120 kVp NCCT (4.45 ± 2.89 mSv) (p < 0.001), equaling a 24.9% dose reduction.
conclusionThe evaluated novel low-dose stone composition protocol allows substantial radiation dose reduction with consistent high diagnostic image quality.
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.