Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34943613›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Virtual Non-Contrast versus True Non-Contrast Computed Tomography: Initial Experiences with a Photon Counting Scanner Approved for Clinical Use.

Julius Henning Niehoff, Matthias Michael Woeltjen, Kai Roman Laukamp, Jan Borggrefe, Jan Robert Kroeger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Julius Henning NiehoffDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.
Matthias Michael WoeltjenDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.
Kai Roman LaukampDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, 50923 Cologne, Germany.
Jan BorggrefeDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.
Jan Robert KroegerDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study evaluates the diagnostic reliability of virtual non-contrast (VNC) images acquired with the first photon counting CT scanner that is approved for clinical use by comparing quantitative image properties of VNC and true non-contrast (TNC) images. Seventy-two patients were retrospectively enrolled in this study. VNC images reconstructed from the arterial (VNCa) and the portalvenous (VNCv) phase were compared to TNC images. In addition, consistency between VNCa and VNCv images was evaluated. Regions of interest (ROI) were drawn in the following areas: liver, spleen, kidney, aorta, muscle, fat and bone. Comparison of VNCa and VNCv images revealed a mean offset of less than 4 HU in all tissues. The greatest difference between TNC and VNC images was found in spongious bone (VNCv 86.13 HU ± 28.44,

Indexed as

computed tomographyiodine quantificationmaterial decompositionphoton counting detectorvirtual non-contrast

Identifiers

PMID34943613
PMCPMC8700090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.