ArticleUrology annals
The use of artificial intelligence and deep learning reconstruction in urological computed tomography: Dose reduction at ghost level.
Article in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-Based Image Reconstruction in Ultra-High-Resolution CT Venography for Improved Visualization of Cerebral Venous Drainage.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of the study is to demonstrate that with the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in computed tomography (CT), radiation doses of CT kidney-ureter-bladder (KUB) and CT urogram (CTU) can be reduced to less than that of X-ray KUB and CT KUB, respectively, while maintaining the good image quality. Materials and Methods: We reviewed all CT KUBs ( Results: One hundred and twenty-one patient's CT KUBs and 74 patient's CTUs were reviewed. For CT KUB group, the mean DLP of 81/121 scans done using AI/DLR scanner (CAOG) was 77.8 mGy cm (1.16 mSv), while the mean DLP of 40/121 CT KUB done with GEO-660 was 317.1 mGy cm (4.75 mSv). For CTU group, the mean DLP for 46/74 scans done using AI/DLR scanner (CAOG) was 401.9 mGy cm (6 mSv), compared to mean DLP of 1352.6 mGy cm (20.2 mSv) from GEO-660. Conclusion: We propose that CT scanners using AI/DLR method have the potential of reducing radiation doses of CT KUB and CTU to such an extent that it heralds the extinction of plain film XR KUB for follow-up of urinary tract stones. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study comparing CT KUB and CTU doses from new scanners utilizing AI/DLR technology with traditional scanners using hybrid iterative reconstruction technology. Moreover, we have shown that this technology can markedly reduce the cumulative radiation burden in all urological patients undergoing CT examinations, whether this is CT KUB or CTU.
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.