Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35461368›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Neuroforamen stenosis remains a challenge in conventional computed tomography and new dual-energy techniques.

Ann-Kathrin Ditges, Torsten Diekhoff, Nils Engelhard, Maximilian Muellner, Matthias Pumberger, Friederike Schömig

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann-Kathrin DitgesDepartment of Radiology, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Torsten DiekhoffDepartment of Radiology, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Nils EngelhardDepartment of Radiology, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Maximilian MuellnerCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Matthias PumbergerCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Friederike SchömigCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. friederike.schoemig@charite.de.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lumbar foraminal stenosis may be caused by osseous and soft tissue structures. Thus, both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play a role in the diagnostic algorithm. Recently, dual-energy CT (DECT) has been introduced for the detection of spinal disorders. Our study's aim was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of collagen-sensitive maps derived from DECT in detecting lumbar foraminal stenosis compared with standard CT and MRI. We retrospectively reviewed CT, DECT, and MRI datasets in patients with vertebral fractures between January 2015 and February 2017. Images were scored for presence and type of lumbar neuroforaminal stenosis. Contingency tables were calculated to determine diagnostic accuracy and interrater agreement was evaluated. 612 neuroforamina in 51 patients were included. Intraclass correlation coefficients for interrater reliability in detecting foraminal stenoses were 0.778 (95%-CI 0.643-0.851) for DECT, 0.769 (95%-CI 0.650-0.839) for CT, and 0.820 (95%-CI 0.673-0.888) for MRI. Both DECT and conventional CT showed good diagnostic accuracy in detecting lumbar foraminal stenosis but low sensitivities in detecting discoid stenosis. Thus, even though previous studies suggest that DECT has high diagnostic accuracy in assessing lumbar disc pathologies, we show that DECT does not provide additional information for detecting discoid stenosis compared with conventional CT.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingTomography, X-Ray ComputedConstriction, PathologicHumansReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID35461368
PMCPMC9035174
OpenAlexW4224434023

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.