ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Dynamic Computed Tomography Angiography as Imaging Method for Endoleak Classification after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Case Series and Systematic Review of the Literature.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic and Prognostic Implications of Ultra-Low-Profile INCRAFT and Ovation Endografts: Long-Term Follow-Up in a Single-Center Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Role of Dynamic Computed Tomography Angiography in Endoleak Detection and Classification After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Innovative Imaging Techniques: Nice to Have or Essential to Treat Complex Diseases?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study evaluated our experience with dynamic computed tomography angiography (dCTA) as a diagnostic tool after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) with respect to the endoleak classification and the available literature.
methodsWe reviewed all patients who underwent dCTA because of suspected endoleaks after the EVAR and classified the endoleaks in these patients based on standard CTA (sCTA) and dCTA. We systematically reviewed all available publications that investigated the diagnostic accuracy of dCTA compared with other imaging techniques.
resultsIn our single-center series, 16 dCTAs were performed in 16 patients. In 11 patients, the undefined endoleaks that appeared on sCTA scans were successfully classified using dCTA. In three patients with a type II endoleak and aneurysm sac growth, inflow arteries were successfully identified using dCTA, and in two patients, aneurysm sac growth was observed without a visible endoleak on both sCTA and dCTA scans. The dCTA revealed four occult endoleaks, all of which were type II endoleaks. The systematic review identified six series comparing dCTA with other imaging methods. All articles reported an excellent outcome regarding the endoleak classification. In published dCTA protocols, the number and timing of phases varied greatly, affecting radiation exposure. Time attenuation curves of the current series show that some phases do not contribute to the endoleak classification and that the use of a test bolus improves the timing of the dCTA.
conclusionsThe dCTA is a valuable additional tool that can identify and classify endoleaks more accurately than the sCTA. Published dCTA protocols vary greatly and should be optimized to decrease radiation exposure as long as accuracy can be maintained. The use of a test bolus to improve the timing of the dCTA is recommended, but the optimal number of scanning phases is yet to be determined.
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.