ArticleEJNMMI physics2022
A novel rotation method with variable-angle anterior probe for correcting the depth of the kidney to optimize renal dynamic imaging.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The rotation method for correcting renal depth in the determination of glomerular filtration rate using Tc-99m diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA)-based renal dynamic imaging in patients with hydronephrosis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Optimization and application of renal depth measurement method in the cadmium-zinc-telluride‑based SPECT/CT renal dynamic imaging.EJNMMI physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to investigate the effect and significance of the rotation method with variable-angle anterior probe corrected for the depth of two kidneys on the determination of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in total and single kidneys by the renal dynamic imaging Gates method.
methodsSeventy-two patients who underwent dynamic renal imaging by the rotation method and abdominal CT in our hospital were collected in the present study. CT scanning, rotation method, Tonnesen's formula, and Li-Qian's formula were compared in terms of the depth of two kidneys, the depth difference between the two kidneys, and the total renal and single GFR obtained by substituting the renal depth values into Gates' formula.
results①The depth of kidneys and GFR: Compared to CT, Tonnesen's formula significantly underestimated the depth of both kidneys and the total and single renal GFR (P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in the depth of both kidneys and the total and single renal GFR between Li-Qian's formula and the rotation method (P > 0.05), with a strong agreement and with the least bias in the values measured by the rotation method. ②Renal depth difference: Compared to CT, Tonnesen's formula and Li-Qian's formula underestimated the difference in depth between the two kidneys (P < 0.05). None of the differences were statistically significant based on the rotation method (P > 0.05). The depth difference was positively correlated with the resulting changes in single renal function (|R(CT)-R(Li-Qian)|) and (|R(Rotation)-R(Li-Qian)|) (r = 0.881, 0.641, P < 0.001). As the depth difference increased, Li-Qian's formula could not visualize changes in single renal function accurately. In contrast, the accuracy of the rotation method in assessing single renal function remains unaffected.
conclusionThe rotation method obtains an accurate depth and depth difference between the two kidneys without additional CT radiation, enhancing the accuracy of the Gates method for determining total and single renal GFR. Trial registration Medical Ethics Committee of First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, 2021BAL0146. Registered 12 January 2021.
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.