Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37280374›Full record

SynthesisAbdominal radiology (New York)2023

Deep-learning CT reconstruction in clinical scans of the abdomen: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mostafa A Shehata, Abdelrahman M Saad, Serageldin Kamel, Nir Stanietzky, Alicia M Roman-Colon, Ajaykumar C Morani, Khaled M Elsayes, Corey T Jensen

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Computed Tomography Imaging of Acute Mesenteric Ischemia for Interventional Radiology.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. State-of-the-Art Deep Learning CT Reconstruction Algorithms in Abdominal Imaging.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2024
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mostafa A ShehataDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
Abdelrahman M SaadFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Serageldin KamelDepartment of Lymphoma and Myeloma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
Nir StanietzkyDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
Alicia M Roman-ColonTexas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Ajaykumar C MoraniDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
Khaled M ElsayesDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
Corey T JensenDepartment of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA. cjensen@mdanderson.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6540-8961
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USAlexandria University · EGTexas Children's Hospital · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the two most common commercially available deep-learning algorithms for CT.

methodsWe used PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science to conduct systematic searches for studies assessing the most common commercially available deep-learning CT reconstruction algorithms: True Fidelity (TF) and Advanced intelligent Clear-IQ Engine (AiCE) in the abdomen of human participants since only these two algorithms currently have adequate published data for robust systematic analysis.

resultsForty-four articles fulfilled inclusion criteria. 32 studies evaluated TF and 12 studies assessed AiCE. DLR algorithms produced images with significantly less noise (22-57.3% less than IR) but preserved a desirable noise texture with increased contrast-to-noise ratios and improved lesion detectability on conventional CT. These improvements with DLR were similarly noted in dual-energy CT which was only assessed for a single vendor. Reported radiation reduction potential was 35.1-78.5%. Nine studies assessed observer performance with the two dedicated liver lesion studies being performed on the same vendor reconstruction (TF). These two studies indicate preserved low contrast liver lesion detection (> 5 mm) at CTDI

conclusionDeep learning reconstructions significantly improve image quality in CT of the abdomen. Assessment of other dose levels and clinical indications is needed. Careful choice of radiation dose levels is necessary, particularly for small liver lesion assessment.

Indexed as

Deep LearningLiver NeoplasmsAbdomenAlgorithmsHumansRadiation DosageRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAbdomenArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkCTDeep learningDose reductionImage reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID37280374
PMCPMC11781595
OpenAlexW4379517290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.