Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39619105›Full record

ReviewHeart views : the official journal of the Gulf Heart Association

Dual-energy Computed Tomography in Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring.

S Abhijith, M M Jaseemudheen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heart views : the official journal of the Gulf Heart Association. 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.

S AbhijithDepartment of Medical Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, REVA University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.
M M JaseemudheenDepartment of Radio-diagnosis and Imaging, KS Hegde Medical Academy (KSHEMA), NITTE (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computed tomographic (CT) coronary artery angiography with calcium scoring is crucial in suspecting coronary artery disease (CAD). The routine protocol for CAD radiological investigation involves a precontrast series for calcium scoring and a postcontrast series for investigating structural changes in coronary arteries. This review intends to investigate the feasibility of virtual noncontrast images to replace the true noncontrast (TNC) images in coronary artery calcium scoring to decrease the radiation dose. The current review included articles found in the PubMed database. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for the further evaluation of the articles for inclusion criteria, 25 articles were finally shortlisted for the final review. It is found that the calcium score of coronary arteries estimated by virtual unenhanced images generated by dual-energy CT (DECT) is comparable with that of TNC images. The virtual unehncanced images has the potential to eliminate the need for the TNC series acquisition, thereby reducing the radiation dose. Especially, photon-counting detector-based DECT has excellent potential in the estimation of calcium scores and the reduction in radiation dose. In addition, contrast dose also can be significantly reduced, which is crucial in patients with renal insufficiency. In conclusion, using DECT for CAD investigations significantly reduces both radiation and contrast doses compared to conventional CT scans. This reduction is particularly crucial for patients who require repeated follow-up scans, as it enhances their safety and minimizes potential risks.

Indexed as

Agatston scoringcoronary artery calcium scoringcoronary artery diseasedual-energy computed tomographyvirtual unenhanced images

Identifiers

PMID39619105
PMCPMC11604197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.