ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Comparison of radiation exposure from dual- and single-energy CT imaging protocols resulting in equivalent contrast-to-noise ratio of lesions for adults and children: a phantom study.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lesion conspicuity assessment of prone 40-keV virtual monoenergetic imaging in arterial-phase photon-counting CT for breast cancer: a retrospective comparison with DCE-MRI.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Research progress on the application of dual energy CT in gastric diseases.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Performance Evaluation of Image Segmentation Using Dual-Energy Spectral CT Images with Deep Learning Image Reconstruction: A Phantom Study.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the radiation exposure from single-energy CT (SECT) against rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT (DECT) imaging in both adults and children when resulting image data offer equivalent lesion identification power. MATERIALS AND
methodsLesions in an adult and a 10-year-old-child body phantom were imitated using iodine solutions of different concentrations. Phantoms were subjected to several SECT and DECT thoracic and abdominal scans using a rapid kV-switching DECT scanner. The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of each lesion was measured on resulting SECT images and virtual monoenergetic images (VMI) available from DECT. The SECT scans that resulted in CNR values similar to the maximum CNR observed in VMIs derived from corresponding DECT scans were identified. SECT and DECT scans with equivalent lesion-discriminating power were compared regarding the associated radiation dose burden. Doses to the lung, breast, and esophagus from thoracic imaging and doses to the liver, kidneys, and stomach from abdominal imaging were determined through Monte Carlo simulations of SECT and DECT exposures.
resultsCompared to SECT imaging of the adult body phantom, organ doses from DECT were found to be 5-11% lower in thoracic imaging and 44-45% lower in abdominal imaging. Compared to SECT imaging of the 10-year-old body phantom, organ doses from DECT were found to be 2.8-3.4 times higher in thoracic imaging and 1.5-1.6 times higher in abdominal imaging.
conclusionThe use of rapid kV-switching DECT instead of SECT imaging may be associated with a similar or lower dose burden in adults but a noticeably higher dose burden in children. KEY POINTS: Question How does the radiation exposure from single-energy and dual-energy CT imaging compare when both techniques provide equivalent lesion identification power? Findings Rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT compared to single-energy CT may result in a similar or lower radiation dose in adults, but higher radiation dose in children. Clinical relevance Rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT imaging in children should be preferred over single-energy CT imaging only in cases where the additional information provided is crucial for an effective diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39694888What 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.