ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Image Quality Comparison of Three 3D Mobile X-Ray Imaging Guidance Devices Used in Spine Surgery: A Phantom Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Implementation of Intraoperative Cone-Beam CT (Loop-X) in an Established Robotic-Assisted Pedicle Screw Program: An Epoch-Based Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Inadvertent detection and management of intraoperative pneumothorax during spinal navigation imaging using Loop-X®.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An image-quality CT phantom was scanned with three different 3D X-ray imaging guidance devices in the operating theatre: O-Arm, Loop-X, and Airo TruCT. Default acquisition and reconstruction parameters for lumbar spine procedures were used on each device. The tube current was set to a dose level of around 27 mGy. A task-based image quality assessment was performed by calculating the noise power spectrum (NPS) and task transfer function (TTF). A detectability index (d') was calculated for three simulated bone lesions. The noise magnitude of the O-Arm was higher than the Airo TruCT, and the Loop-X had higher noise than the Airo TruCT. The highest average NPS frequency was for the O-Arm images, and the lowest was for the Loop-X. The TTFs at 50% values were similar for the Airo TruCT and Loop-X devices. Compared to Airo TruCT, the TTF at 50% value increased with the O-Arm by 53.12% and 41.20% for the Teflon and Delrin inserts, respectively. Compared to Airo TruCT, the d' value was lower with Loop-X by -26.73%, -27.02%, and -23.95% for lytic lesions, sclerotic lesions, and high-density bone, respectively. Each 3D-imaging spine surgery guidance device has its own strengths and weaknesses in terms of image quality. Cone-beam CT systems apparently offer the best compromise between noise and spatial resolution for spine surgery.
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.