ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Improved overall image quality in low-dose dual-energy computed tomography enterography using deep-learning image reconstruction.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduced environmental impact in body CT imaging with deep learning reconstruction: experience of a high-volume tertiary referral center.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- A paradigm shift in oncology imaging: a prospective cross-sectional study to assess low-dose deep learning image reconstruction versus standard-dose iterative reconstruction for comprehensive lesion detection in dual-energy computed tomography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo demonstrate the clinical advantages of a deep-learning image reconstruction (DLIR) in low-dose dual-energy computed tomography enterography (DECTE) by comparing images with standard-dose adaptive iterative reconstruction-Veo (ASIR-V) images.
methodsIn this Institutional review board approved prospective study, 86 participants who underwent DECTE were enrolled. The early-enteric phase scan was performed using standard-dose (noise index: 8) and images were reconstructed at 5 mm and 1.25 mm slice thickness with ASIR-V at a level of 40% (ASIR-V40%). The late-enteric phase scan used low-dose (noise index: 12) and images were reconstructed at 1.25 mm slice thickness with ASIR-V40%, and DLIR at medium (DLIR-M) and high (DLIR-H). The 70 keV monochromatic images were used for image comparison and analysis. For objective assessment, image noise, artifact index, SNR and CNR were measured. For subjective assessment, subjective noise, image contrast, bowel wall sharpness, mesenteric vessel clarity, and small structure visibility were scored by two radiologists blindly. Radiation dose was compared between the early- and late-enteric phases.
resultsRadiation dose was reduced by 50% in the late-enteric phase [(6.31 ± 1.67) mSv] compared with the early-enteric phase [(3.01 ± 1.09) mSv]. For the 1.25 mm images, DLIR-M and DLIR-H significantly improved both objective and subjective image quality compared to those with ASIR-V40%. The low-dose 1.25 mm DLIR-H images had similar image noise, SNR, CNR values as the standard-dose 5 mm ASIR-V40% images, but significantly higher scores in image contrast [5(5-5), P < 0.05], bowel wall sharpness [5(5-5), P < 0.05], mesenteric vessel clarity [5(5-5), P < 0.05] and small structure visibility [5(5-5), P < 0.05].
conclusionsDLIR significantly reduces image noise at the same slice thickness, but significantly improves spatial resolution and lesion conspicuity with thinner slice thickness in DECTE, compared to conventional ASIR-V40% 5 mm images, all while providing 50% radiation dose reduction.
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.