ArticlePloS one2023
Tin filter compared to low kV protocols - optimizing sinonasal imaging in computed tomography.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automatic cochlear morphometry: intraindividual comparison of head CT vs carotid CT angiography, cervical spine, and paranasal sinus CT.European radiology · 2026Article
- Quantitative and qualitative assessment of ultra-low-dose paranasal sinus CT using deep learning image reconstruction: a comparison with hybrid iterative reconstruction.European radiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Dose development in sinonasal imaging over the last decade - a retrospective patient study.Head & face medicine · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesParanasal sinus imaging due to chronic inflammatory disease is one of the most common examinations in head and neck radiology with CT imaging considered the current gold standard. In this phantom study we analyzed different low dose CT protocols in terms of image quality, radiation exposure and subjective evaluation in order to establish an optimized scanning protocol.
methodsIn a phantom study, an Alderson phantom was scanned using 12 protocols between 70-120 kV and 25-200 mAs with and without tin filtration. For all datasets, iterative reconstruction was used. Data were objectively evaluated (image noise, (dose-weighted) contrast-to-noise ratio) and for subjective evaluation an online survey using a Likert scale was performed to reach a large group of clinically experienced reader (n = 62). The protocol was considered diagnostically insufficient if the median score was 4 and above and if more than 10% of raters scored 4 and above on the Likert scale. For an interreader agreement an ICC was calculated. To compare clinical value in relation to the applied dose and the objective image parameters, we calculated a figure of merit (FOM) and ranked the protocols accordingly.
resultsThere was an overall moderate agreement between the 62 readers for the 12 examined CT protocols. In this phantom study, protocols with 100 kV with spectral shaping and 50-100 mAs obtained the best results for its combination of dose, image quality and clinical information value for diagnosing sinusitis (FOM 1st- 2nd place) with the 70 kV and 50 mAs as a good alternative as well (Sinusitis: FOM shared 2nd). For preoperative planning, where a higher dose is necessary, 100 kV with spectral shaping and 100 mAs achieved the overall best results (FOM 1st place) with 70 kV and 50 mAs ranking 4th.
conclusion100-kV protocols with spectral shaping or low kV protocols (70 kV) with a similarly low dose showed the best figure of merit for imaging sinonasal disease and preoperative planning. With modern scanner technology available, spectral shaping or low KV protocols should be used for sinusitis imaging.
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.