ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale2020
Combined application of single-energy metal artifact reduction and reconstruction techniques in patients with Cochlear implants.
Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Angular Insertion Depth for Cochlear Implantation: A Comparative Analysis on Precision of CT, MRI, and x-Ray.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- X-ray guided anatomy-based fitting: The validity of OTOPLAN.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to develop an effective method of reducing metal artifacts in cochlear implant (CI) electrodes.
methodsThe temporal bones of 30 patients (34 ears) after CI were examined with 320-detector row computed tomography, which was evaluated by two senior radiologists using a double-blind method. Noise, artifact index, signal-to-noise ratio, and the subjective image quality score were compared before versus after using single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR). The electrode position, single electrode visibility, and electrode count were evaluated using SEMAR combined with either multi-planar reconstruction (MPR) or maximum intensity projection.
resultsThe two radiologists' measurements had good consistency. SEMAR significantly reduced the image noise and artifacts index and significantly improved the signal-to-noise ratio and subjective image quality score (P < 0.01). The combination of SEMAR with MPR was conducive to accurate assessment of electrode position and single-electrode visibility. The combination of SEMAR with MIP facilitated accurate and intuitive matching of the assessed electrode count with the number of electrodes implanted during the operation (P = 0.062).
conclusionSEMAR significantly reduces metal artifacts generated by CI electrodes and improves the quality of computed tomography images. The combination of SEMAR with MPR and maximum intensity projection is beneficial for evaluating the position and number of CI electrodes.
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.