ArticlePloS one2021
Improvement of image quality and assessment of respiratory motion for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis using contrast-enhanced four-dimensional dual-energy computed tomography.
Article in PloS one, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Motion Artifact Correction Technique for Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Image Considering Blood Vessel Geometry.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the objective and subjective image quality, and respiratory motion of hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) using the contrast-enhanced four-dimensional dual-energy computed tomography (CE-4D-DECT). For twelve patients, the virtual monochromatic image (VMI) derived from the CE-4D-DECT with the highest contrast to noise ratio (CNR) was determined as the optimal VMI (O-VMI). To assess the objective and subjective image quality, the CNR and five-point score of the O-VMI were compared to those of the standard VMI at 77 keV (S-VMI). The respiratory motion of the PVTT and diaphragm was measured based on the exhale and inhale phase images. The VMI at 60 keV yielded the highest CNR (4.8 ± 1.4) which was significantly higher (p = 0.02) than that in the S-VMI (3.8 ± 1.2). The overall image quality (4.0 ± 0.6 vs 3.1 ± 0.5) and tumor conspicuity (3.8 ± 0.8 vs 2.8 ± 0.6) of the O-VMI determined by three radiation oncologists was significantly higher (p < 0.01) than that of the S-VMI. The diaphragm motion in the L-R (3.3 ± 2.5 vs 1.2 ± 1.1 mm), A-P (6.7 ± 4.0 vs 1.6 ± 1.3mm) and 3D (8.8 ± 3.5 vs 13.1 ± 4.9 mm) directions were significantly larger (p < 0.05) compared to the tumor motion. The improvement of objective and subjective image quality was achieved in the O-VMI. Because the respiratory motion of the diaphragm was larger than that of the PVTT, we need to be pay attention for localizing target in radiotherapy.
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.