Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36416936›Full record

SynthesisClinical neuroradiology2023

Computed Tomography of the Spine : Systematic Review on Acquisition and Reconstruction Techniques to Reduce Radiation Dose.

Michael Dieckmeyer, Nico Sollmann, Karina Kupfer, Maximilian T Löffler, Karolin J Paprottka, Jan S Kirschke, Thomas Baum

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical neuroradiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Simulated low-dose multi-detector computed tomography: spatial effects on surrogate parameters of bone strength at the proximal femur.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael DieckmeyerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. michael.dieckmeyer@tum.de.
Nico SollmannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Karina KupferDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Maximilian T LöfflerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Karolin J PaprottkaDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Jan S KirschkeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Thomas BaumDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Klinikum rechts der Isar · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 432290010HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council 963904
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The introduction of the first whole-body CT scanner in 1974 marked the beginning of cross-sectional spine imaging. In the last decades, the technological advancement, increasing availability and clinical success of CT led to a rapidly growing number of CT examinations, also of the spine. After initially being primarily used for trauma evaluation, new indications continued to emerge, such as assessment of vertebral fractures or degenerative spine disease, preoperative and postoperative evaluation, or CT-guided interventions at the spine; however, improvements in patient management and clinical outcomes come along with higher radiation exposure, which increases the risk for secondary malignancies. Therefore, technical developments in CT acquisition and reconstruction must always include efforts to reduce the radiation dose. But how exactly can the dose be reduced? What amount of dose reduction can be achieved without compromising the clinical value of spinal CT examinations and what can be expected from the rising stars in CT technology: artificial intelligence and photon counting CT? In this article, we try to answer these questions by systematically reviewing dose reduction techniques with respect to the major clinical indications of spinal CT. Furthermore, we take a concise look on the dose reduction potential of future developments in CT hardware and software.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceTomography, X-Ray ComputedCross-Sectional StudiesHumansRadiation DosageSpineDose reductionImage acquisitionImage reconstructionLow doseMulti-detector computed tomography

Identifiers

PMID36416936
PMCPMC10220150
OpenAlexW4309746189

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.