ArticleCureus2022
Comparative Evaluation of Multidetector Computed Tomography and Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Findings in Gastrointestinal Tuberculosis.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) imaging findings in gastrointestinal (GI) tuberculosis.
objectiveTo study imaging findings of MDCT and DECT in GI tuberculosis. METHODOLOGY: All the patients falling in the sampling frame and fulfilling the eligibility criteria were clinically examined and demographic details, presenting complaints, medical history, history of anti-tubercular treatment (ATT) intake, personal habits, and family history of tuberculosis were noted. All the patients underwent sputum acid-fast bacilli (AFB) assessment. Outcomes of investigations like bronchoscopy and fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC)/biopsy were also noted wherever available. Ascitic fluid AFB and culture assessments were also performed wherever feasible. All CT scans were performed on a 384-slice dual-energy CT scanner (Somaton Force, Siemens Healthcare) and all the images were post-processed on a workstation using syngo.via software that allows the analysis of images using three material decompositions. Features like peritonitis, lymph node involvement, GI wall thickening, and solid organ involvement were focused on. Subjective assessment of images of both MDCT and DECT were assessed by two experienced radiologists to prepare the CT diagnosis. The mutual agreement of the two observers was considered final.
conclusionsThe findings of the study showed that both MDCT, as well as DECT, were useful in the diagnosis of GI tuberculosis. On the basis of these findings, DECT could be considered to have an edge over MDCT in the diagnosis of GI tuberculosis. Keeping in view the small sample size and high prevalence, further studies on a larger sample size with relaxed sampling criteria are recommended to validate the findings of the present study.
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.