ArticleSkeletal radiology2021
Low-dose CT with metal artifact reduction in arthroplasty imaging: a cadaveric and clinical study.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Uses for Medical Imaging With Orthopaedic Implant Technology.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether a simulated low-dose metal artifact reduction (MAR) CT technique is comparable with a clinical dose MAR technique for shoulder arthroplasty evaluation. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo shoulder arthroplasties in cadavers and 25 shoulder arthroplasties in patients were scanned using a clinical dose (140 kVp, 300 qrmAs); cadavers were also scanned at half dose (140 kVp, 150 qrmAs). Images were reconstructed using a MAR CT algorithm at full dose and a noise-insertion algorithm simulating 50% dose reduction. For the actual and simulated half-dose cadaver scans, differences in SD for regions of interest were assessed, and streak artifact near the arthroplasty was graded by 3 blinded readers. Simulated half-dose scans were compared with full-dose scans in patients by measuring differences in implant position and by comparing readers' grades of periprosthetic osteolysis and muscle atrophy.
resultsThe mean difference in SD between actual and simulated half-dose methods was 2.42 HU (95% CI [1.4, 3.4]). No differences in streak artifact grades were seen in 13/18 (72.2%) comparisons in cadavers. In patients, differences in implant position measurements were within 1° or 1 mm in 149/150 (99.3%) measurements. The inter-reader agreement rates were nearly identical when readers were using full-dose (77.3% [232/300] for osteolysis and 76.9% [173/225] for muscle atrophy) and simulated half-dose (76.7% [920/1200] for osteolysis and 74.0% [666/900] for muscle atrophy) scans.
conclusionA simulated half-dose MAR CT technique is comparable both quantitatively and qualitatively with a standard-dose technique for shoulder arthroplasty evaluation, demonstrating that this technique could be used to reduce dose in arthroplasty imaging.
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.