ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024
Synthetic interpolated DSA for radiation exposure reduction via gamma variate contrast flow modeling: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. 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, 0 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
13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital subtraction angiography (DSA) yields high cumulative radiation dosages (RD) delivered to patients. We present a temporal interpolation of low frame rate angiograms as a method to reduce cumulative RDs.
methodsPatients undergoing interventional evaluation and treatment of cerebrovascular vasospasm following subarachnoid hemorrhage were retrospectively identified. DSAs containing pre- and post-intervention runs capturing the full arterial, capillary, and venous phases with at least 16 frames each were selected. Frame rate reduction (FRR) of the original DSAs was performed to 50%, 66%, and 75% of the original frame rate. Missing frames were regenerated by sampling a gamma variate model (GVM) fit to the contrast response curves to the reduced data. A formal reader study was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the "synthetic" studies (sDSA) compared to the original DSA.
resultsThirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria (average RD 1,361.9 mGy). Seven were excluded for differing views, magnifications, or motion. GVMs fit to 50%, 66%, and 75% FRR studies demonstrated average voxel errors of 2.0 ± 2.5% (mean ± standard deviation), 6.5 ± 1.5%, and 27 ± 2%, respectively for anteroposterior projections, 2.0 ± 2.2%, 15.0 ± 3.1%, and 14.8 ± 13.0% for lateral projections, respectively. Reconstructions took 0.51 s/study. Reader studies demonstrated an average rating of 12.8 (95% CI 12.3-13.3) for 75% FRR, 12.7 (12.2-13.2) for 66% FRR and 12.0 (11.5-12.5) for 50% FRR using Subjective Image Grading Scale. Kendall's coefficient of concordance resulted in W = 0.506.
conclusionFRR by 75% combined with GVM reconstruction does not compromise diagnostic quality for the assessment of cerebral vasculature. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Using this novel algorithm, it is possible to reduce the frame rate of DSA by as much as 75%, with a proportional reduction in radiation exposure, without degrading imaging quality. KEY POINTS: • DSA delivers some of the highest doses of radiation to patients. • Frame rate reduction (FRR) was combined with bolus tracking to interpolate intermediate frames. • This technique provided a 75% FRR with preservation of diagnostic utility as graded by a formal reader study for cerebral angiography performed for the evaluation of cerebral vasospasm. • This approach can be applied to other types of angiography studies.
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.