Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38493258›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

State-of-the-art mobile head CT scanner delivers nearly the same image quality as a conventional stationary CT scanner.

Lukas Goertz, Yosef Al-Sewaidi, Mahmoud Habib, David Zopfs, Benjamin Reichardt, Alexander Ranft, Christoph Kabbasch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Clinical applications of portable CT scanners.The British journal of radiology · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lukas GoertzDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, University of Cologne, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. lukas.goertz@uk-koeln.de.
Yosef Al-SewaidiDepartment of Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Klinikum Hochsauerland, Arnsberg, Germany.
Mahmoud HabibDepartment of Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Klinikum Hochsauerland, Arnsberg, Germany.
David ZopfsDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, University of Cologne, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Benjamin ReichardtDepartment of Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Klinikum Hochsauerland, Arnsberg, Germany.
Alexander Ranft *Department of Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Klinikum Hochsauerland, Arnsberg, Germany.
Christoph Kabbasch *Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, University of Cologne, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Klinikum Arnsberg · DEUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of mobile head CT scanners in the neurointensive care unit (NICU) saves time for patients and NICU staff and can reduce transport-related mishaps, but the reduced image quality of previous mobile scanners has prevented their widespread clinical use. This study compares the image quality of SOMATOM On.Site (Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany), a state-of-the-art mobile head CT scanner, and a conventional 64-slice stationary CT scanner. The study included 40 patients who underwent head scans with both mobile and stationary scanners. Gray and white matter signal and noise were measured at predefined locations on axial slices, and signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were calculated. Artifacts below the cranial calvaria and in the posterior fossa were also measured. In addition, image quality was subjectively assessed by two radiologists in terms of corticomedullary differentiation, subcalvarial space, skull artifacts, and image noise. Quantitative measurements showed significantly higher image quality of the stationary CT scanner in terms of noise, SNR and CNR of gray and white matter. Artifacts measured in the posterior fossa were higher with the mobile CT scanner, but subcalvarial artifacts were comparable. Subjective image quality was rated similarly by two radiologists for both scanners in all domains except image noise, which was better for stationary CT scans. The image quality of the SOMATOM On.Site for brain scans is inferior to that of the conventional stationary scanner, but appears to be adequate for daily use in a clinical setting based on subjective ratings.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedWhite MatterHeadHumansRadiation DosageSkullTomography Scanners, X-Ray ComputedComputed tomographyICUIntracranial haemorrhageMobile CT

Identifiers

PMID38493258
PMCPMC10944493
OpenAlexW4392878426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.