ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Calculation of virtual 3D subtraction angiographies using conditional generative adversarial networks (cGANs).
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based frame synthesis enables radiation dose reduction in digital subtraction angiography imaging: a multicenter study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSubtraction angiographies are calculated using a native and a contrast-enhanced 3D angiography images. This minimizes both bone and metal artifacts and results in a pure image of the vessels. However, carrying out the examination twice means double the radiation dose for the patient. With the help of generative AI, it could be possible to simulate subtraction angiographies from contrast-enhanced 3D angiographies and thus reduce the need for another dose of radiation without a cutback in quality. We implemented this concept by using conditional generative adversarial networks.
methodsWe selected all 3D subtraction angiographies from our PACS system, which had performed between 01/01/2018 and 12/31/2022 and randomly divided them into training, validation, and test sets (66%:17%:17%). We adapted the pix2pix framework to work on 3D data and trained a conditional generative adversarial network with 621 data sets. Additionally, we used 158 data sets for validation and 164 for testing. We evaluated two test sets with (n = 72) and without artifacts (n = 92). Five (blinded) neuroradiologists compared these datasets with the original subtraction dataset. They assessed similarity, subjective image quality, and severity of artifacts.
resultsImage quality and subjective diagnostic accuracy of the virtual subtraction angiographies revealed no significant differences compared to the original 3D angiographies. While bone and movement artifact level were reduced, artifact level caused by metal implants differed from case to case between both angiographies without one group being significant superior to the other.
conclusionConditional generative adversarial networks can be used to simulate subtraction angiographies in clinical practice, however, new artifacts can also appear as a result of this technology.
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.