ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022
Utility of an automatic adaptive iterative metal artifact reduction AiMAR algorithm in improving CT imaging of patients with hip prostheses evaluated for suspected bladder malignancy.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Evaluation of an Innovative Metal-Artifact-Reduction Algorithm in FD-CT Angiography in Cerebral Aneurysms Treated by Endovascular Coiling or Surgical Clipping.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the utility of a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm to standard imaging in improving visualization of key structures, diagnostic confidence, and patient-level confidence in malignancy in patients with suspected bladder cancer.
methodsPatients with hip implants undergoing CT urography for suspected bladder malignancy were enrolled. Images were reconstructed using 3 methods: (1) Filtered Back Projection (FBP), (2) Iterative Metal Artifact Reduction (iMAR), and (3) Adaptive Iterative Metal Artifact Reduction (AiMAR) strength 4. In multiple reading sessions, three radiologists graded visualization of critical anatomic structures and artifact severity (6-point scales, lower scores desirable), and diagnostic confidence in blinded fashion. They also graded patient-level confidence in malignancy based on imaging findings in each patient.
resultsThirty-two patients (8 females) with a mean age of 74.5 ± 8.5 years were included. The median (range) visualization scores for FBP, iMAR, and AiMAR were 3.6 (1.1-4.9), 1.6 (0.3-2.8), and 1.6 (0.3-2.6), respectively. Both iMAR and AiMAR had anatomic visualization and artifact scores better than FBP (P < 0.001 for both) and similar to each other (P > 0.05). Structures with the most improvement in visualization score with the use of metal artifact reduction algorithms included the obturator internus muscle, internal and external iliac nodal chains, and vagina. iMAR and AiMAR improved diagnostic confidence (P < 0.001) and patient-level confidence in malignancy (P ≤ 0.24).
conclusionFor patients with hip prostheses and suspected bladder malignancy, the use of iMAR or AiMAR was shown to significantly reduce metal artifacts, thus improving diagnostic confidence and patient-level confidence in malignancy.
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.