ArticleScientific reports2021
Dose reduction potential in cone-beam CT imaging of upper extremity joints with a twin robotic x-ray system.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metal artifact reduction in ultra-high-resolution cone-beam CT imaging with a twin robotic X-ray system.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- One-stop-shop CT arthrography of the wrist without subject repositioning by means of gantry-free cone-beam CT.Scientific reports · 2022Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cone-beam computed tomography is a powerful tool for 3D imaging of the appendicular skeleton, facilitating detailed visualization of bone microarchitecture. This study evaluated various combinations of acquisition and reconstruction parameters for the cone-beam CT mode of a twin robotic x-ray system in cadaveric wrist and elbow scans, aiming to define the best possible trade-off between image quality and radiation dose. Images were acquired with different combinations of tube voltage and tube current-time product, resulting in five scan protocols with varying volume CT dose indices: full-dose (FD; 17.4 mGy), low-dose (LD; 4.5 mGy), ultra-low-dose (ULD; 1.15 mGy), modulated low-dose (mLD; 0.6 mGy) and modulated ultra-low-dose (mULD; 0.29 mGy). Each set of projection data was reconstructed with three convolution kernels (very sharp [Ur77], sharp [Br69], intermediate [Br62]). Five radiologists subjectively assessed the image quality of cortical bone, cancellous bone and soft tissue using seven-point scales. Irrespective of the reconstruction kernel, overall image quality of every FD, LD and ULD scan was deemed suitable for diagnostic use in contrast to mLD (very sharp/sharp/intermediate: 60/55/70%) and mULD (0/3/5%). Superior depiction of cortical and cancellous bone was achieved in FD
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.