ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2021
Low kV Computed Tomography of Parenchymal Abdominal Organs-A Systematic Animal Study of Different Contrast Media Injection Protocols.
Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Feasibility Study to Evaluate Replacing Conventional Computed Tomography at 120 KVP with Low Radiation Dose and Low Iodine Intake Based on Body Mass Index-Adapted Abdominal Computed Tomography Angiography in 291 Patients.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Impact of CT Photon-Counting Virtual Monoenergetic Imaging on Visualization of Abdominal Arterial Vessels.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate multiphase low kV computed tomography (CT) imaging of the abdomen with reduced contrast media (CM) dose using different injection protocols.
methodsTwo injection protocols were evaluated for use with low kV (80 kV) multiphase abdominal imaging in comparison to the standard procedure acquired at 120 kV (500 mgI/kg; 5 mL/s). This evaluation was conducted in a highly standardized animal study (5 Goettingen minipigs). The low kV protocols consisted of (a) a single-flow (SF) injection with 40% reduced CM dose and injection rate (300 mgI/kg; 3 mL/s) and (b) a DualFlow (DF) injection protocol consisting of 60%/40% contrast to saline ratio administered at 5 mL/s. Dynamic CT was first performed within representative liver regions to determine optimal contrast phases, followed by evaluation of the three protocols in multiphase abdominal CT imaging. The evaluation criteria included contrast enhancement (CE) of abdominal organs and vasculature.
resultsThe 80 kV DF injection protocol showed similar CE of the abdominal parenchymatous organs and vessels to the 120 kV reference and the 80 kV SF protocol. Hepatic parenchyma showed comparable CT values for all contrast phases. In particular, in the portal venous parenchymal phase, the 80 kV DF protocol demonstrated higher hepatic parenchymal enhancement; however, results were statistically non-significant. Similarly, CE of the kidney, pancreas, and abdominal arterial/venous vessels showed no significant differences between injection protocols.
conclusionsAdapted SF and DF injection protocols with reduced IDR/iodine load offer the potential to calibrate optimal CM doses to the tube voltage in abdominal multiphase low kV CT imaging. The data suggest that the DF approach allows the use of predefined injection protocols and adaption of the contrast to saline ratio to an individualized kV setting and yields the potential for patient-individualized CM adaption.
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.