ArticleRadiological physics and technology2024
Patient radiation exposure dose reduction using stent-enhanced image processing in percutaneous coronary intervention.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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.
- Comparison of Radiation Dose Between Dedicated Cardiac and General-Purpose Angiography Systems in Coronary Intervention.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Investigation of patient radiation exposure reduction through optimization of imaging conditions for stent enhancement processing in percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective study.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the reduction in patient radiation exposure dose during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by stent enhancement processing. We examined the effects of dose reduction based on the image quality of stent enhancement processing using a purpose-built dynamic phantom. We evaluated the image contrast (IC) of the stent in stent-enhanced images (SVref), digital angiography (DA), and stent-enhanced images with a 20%, 40%, and 60% lower imaging doses (SV20, SV40, and SV60). We visually evaluated graininess and stent shape using the mean opinion score (MOS) and retrospectively evaluated the acquisition duration of stent enhancement in PCI cases; finally, we estimated the decrease in patient radiation exposure due to stent enhancement. The image contrast of SVref at phantom thicknesses of 20 cm was 51.25 ± 3.82, while the image contrast of DA was significantly reduced at 14.90 ± 1.57 (p < 0.05). We observed a significant decrease in the MOS of graininess in SV60 and MOS of stent shape in DA (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the average imaging duration for stent enhancement using PCI was 22.65 ± 7.43 s, and the maximum imaging duration was 68.07 s. We hypothesize that patient radiation exposure dose can be reduced by up to 60.17 mGy by lowering the imaging dose during the stent enhancement process. Stent enhancement processing improves the visibility of stent images, and can reduce radiation exposure by approximately 40% during confirmation imaging of stents. Our study contributes to the reduction of radiation exposure dose for operators and patients in PCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38578581What 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.