ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2023
Synthetic dual-energy CT reconstruction from single-energy CT Using artificial intelligence.
Article 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 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning for synthetic contrast-enhanced CT and MRI: a scoping review.European radiology · 2026Article
- CT-based synthetic contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT generation using conditional denoising diffusion probabilistic model.Physics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Clinical applications of generative artificial intelligence in radiology: image translation, synthesis, and text generation.BJR artificial intelligence · 2024Review
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop and assess the utility of synthetic dual-energy CT (sDECT) images generated from single-energy CT (SECT) using two state-of-the-art generative adversarial network (GAN) architectures for artificial intelligence-based image translation.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 734 patients (389F; 62.8 years ± 14.9) who underwent enhanced DECT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis between January 2018 and June 2019 were included. Using 70-keV as the input images (n = 141,009) and 50-keV, iodine, and virtual unenhanced (VUE) images as outputs, separate models were trained using Pix2PixHD and CycleGAN. Model performance on the test set (n = 17,839) was evaluated using mean squared error, structural similarity index, and peak signal-to-noise ratio. To objectively test the utility of these models, synthetic iodine material density and 50-keV images were generated from SECT images of 16 patients with gastrointestinal bleeding performed at another institution. The conspicuity of gastrointestinal bleeding using sDECT was compared to portal venous phase SECT. Synthetic VUE images were generated from 37 patients who underwent a CT urogram at another institution and model performance was compared to true unenhanced images.
resultssDECT from both Pix2PixHD and CycleGAN were qualitatively indistinguishable from true DECT by a board-certified radiologist (avg accuracy 64.5%). Pix2PixHD had better quantitative performance compared to CycleGAN (e.g., structural similarity index for iodine: 87% vs. 46%, p-value < 0.001). sDECT using Pix2PixHD showed increased bleeding conspicuity for gastrointestinal bleeding and better removal of iodine on synthetic VUE compared to CycleGAN.
conclusionssDECT from SECT using Pix2PixHD may afford some of the advantages of DECT.
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.