ArticleEmergency radiology2021
Effects of multiphase versus single-phase CT angiography for the detection of distal cerebral vessel occlusion.
Article in Emergency 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current and future trends in acute ischemic stroke treatment: direct-to-angiography suite, middle vessel occlusion, large core, and minor strokes.European journal of radiology open · 2023Article
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
purposeThe goal of this study was to determine whether the benefits of multiphase CTA (mCTA) over single-phase CTA (sCTA) for the detection of proximal cerebrovascular occlusions similarly extend to the distal cerebral vasculature.
methodsFour attending radiologists, two neuroradiologists and two emergency radiologists, contributed as readers to this retrospective study. For each reader, two sessions were conducted, one using sCTA and one using mCTA. During each session, the reader interpreted the studies of 104 patients who underwent imaging for suspicion of acute ischemic stroke, resulting in a total of 832 interpretations. Changes in diagnostic accuracy, time to render final decision, and reported levels of reader confidence were quantitatively assessed. Further analysis comparing the effects for neuroradiologists versus emergency radiologists was additionally conducted.
resultsUsing mCTA resulted in a significant 5.0% absolute increase in sensitivity (91.6% vs. 96.6%, p = .004) and an insignificant increase in specificity (99.5% vs. 99.7%, p = .39). A significant reduction in reading time (66.7 s vs. 59.6 s, p = .001) and an increase in diagnostic confidence (2.26 vs. 2.58, p < .001) were observed. Using sCTA, higher sensitivity was achieved by neuroradiologists than emergency radiologists (96.0% vs. 86.9%, p = .002); using mCTA resulted in an absolute increase in sensitivity of 0.9% (97.4%, p = .44) for neuroradiologists and 9.6% (96.5%, p < .001) for emergency radiologists, eliminating significant differences between the groups (p = 0.57).
conclusionThe use of mCTA results in increased sensitivity and negative predictive value, decreased reading time, increased diagnostic confidence, and the elimination of differences in accuracy between neuroradiologists and emergency radiologists.
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.