ArticleInsights into imaging2022
Ultra-low-dose computed tomography for torsion measurements of the lower extremities in children and adolescents.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tin-filtered ultra-low-dose CT for lower limb torsion measurements in children and adolescents: a prospective study.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle: Comparison with computer tomography and clinical application in a diagnostic algorithm.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Radiological assessment of lower limb torsional deformities: a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2025Review
- Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence for pediatric pulmonary nodule detection on chest computed tomography: comparison of simulated lower radiation doses.European journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Patellar Tracking: An Old Problem with New Insights.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantifying femoral and tibial torsion is crucial in the preoperative planning for derotation surgery in children and adolescents. The use of an ultra-low-dose computed tomography (CT) protocol might be possible for modern CT scanners and suitable for reliable torsion measurements even though the bones are not completely ossified.
methodsThis is a retrospective review of 77 children/adolescents (mean age 12.7 years) who underwent a lower extremity CT for torsion measurements on a 64-slice scanner. A stepwise dose reduction (70%, 50%, 30% of the original dose) was simulated. Torsion measurements were performed on all image datasets, and image noise, interrater agreement and subjective image quality were evaluated. Effective radiation dose of each original scan was estimated. As proof of concept, 24 children were scanned with an ultra-low-dose protocol, adapted from the 30% dose simulation, and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was determined. Ethics approval and informed consent were given.
resultsTorsion measurements at the simulated 30% dose level had equivalent interrater agreement compared to the 100% dose level (ICC ≥ 0.99 for all locations and dose levels). Image quality of almost all datasets was rated excellent, regardless of dose. The mean sum of the effective dose of the total torsion measurement was reduced by simulation from 0.460/0.490 mSv (boys/girls) at 100% dose to 0.138/0.147 mSv at 30%. The ICC of the proof-of-concept group was as good as that of the simulated 30% dose level.
conclusionPediatric torsion measurements of the lower extremities can be performed using an ultra-low-dose protocol without compromising diagnostic confidence.
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.