Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35112139›Full record

ReviewSkeletal radiology2022

Dual energy CT in musculoskeletal applications beyond crystal imaging: bone marrow maps and metal artifact reduction.

Gaurav Cheraya, Salil Sharma, Avneesh Chhabra

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Skeletal radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Imaging mimickers of MSK infection.Skeletal radiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dual-Energy CT in Oncologic Imaging.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

3 authors.

Gaurav CherayaMary Imogene Bassett Hospital, Cooperstown, NY, USA.
Salil SharmaMary Imogene Bassett Hospital, Cooperstown, NY, USA.
Avneesh ChhabraUT Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, TX, USA. Avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dual energy CT (DECT) is becoming increasingly popular and valuable in the domain of musculoskeletal imaging. Gout maps and crystal detection have been predominant indications for about a decade. Other important indications of bone marrow maps and metal artifact reduction are also frequent with added advantages of detection and characterization of bone marrow lesions similar to MR imaging and diagnosis of hardware related complications, respectively. This article discusses technical considerations and physics of DECT imaging and its role in musculoskeletal indications apart from crystal imaging with respective case examples and review of the related literature. DECT pitfalls in these domains are also highlighted and the reader can gain knowledge of above concepts for prudent use of DECT in their musculoskeletal and general practices.

Indexed as

Bone DiseasesMusculoskeletal SystemRadiography, Dual-Energy Scanned ProjectionArtifactsBone MarrowHumansTomography, X-Ray ComputedBone marrowDECTDual energy CTFractureMetal artifact reduction

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.