Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39283503›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024

[The challenging patient-recommendations and solutions].

Roman Johannes Gertz, Lenhard Pennig

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Roman Johannes GertzInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Medizinische Fakultät und Uniklinik Köln, Universität zu Köln, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Köln, Deutschland.
Lenhard PennigInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Medizinische Fakultät und Uniklinik Köln, Universität zu Köln, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Köln, Deutschland. Lenhard.pennig@uk-koeln.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe continuous technical development of cardiac computed tomography (CT) over the last decades has led to an improvement in image quality and diagnostic accuracy, while simultaneously reducing radiation exposure. Despite these advancements, certain patient-related factors remain a challenge to conduct a high-quality diagnostic examination. QUESTION: What factors can negatively affect the image quality of cardiac CT and how can these be addressed? MATERIALS AND

methodsAnalysis of the available literature on cardiac CT and identification of the quality-limiting factors, discussion, and possible solutions.

resultsTachycardia, arrhythmias, high coronary calcification, the presence of stents and coronary artery bypasses, as well as obesity and anxiety were identified as primary factors that limit image quality and diagnostic accuracy. These issues primarily arise from a lack of response or the presence of contraindications to premedication, blooming artifacts, variations in postoperative anatomy, as well as other personal factors. Suggested solutions include optimizing premedication, scanner modifications, the selection of the most suitable acquisition mode, new scanner technologies, and innovative image reconstruction methods including artificial intelligence.

conclusionsCertain factors continue to pose a major challenge for cardiac CT. Knowledge of alternative premedication, scanner modifications, as well as the use of postprocessing software and new technologies can help overcome these limitations, enabling successful and safe cardiac CTs even in challenging patients.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedHeart DiseasesHumansArrhythmiaCalcificationCoronary computed tomography angiographyStentsTachycardia

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.