Trial reportJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Clinical application of third-generation dual-source CT-based dynamic imaging reconstruction for pulmonary embolism imaging.
Trial report in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the clinical diagnostic value of third-generation dual-source CT for pulmonary embolism, focusing on the optimization of dual-source CT scanning with dynamic reconstruction in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and various imaging manifestations.
methodsEighty-two patients with pulmonary embolism were enrolled and randomly divided into standard CT angiography (SCTA) and dynamic CT angiography (DCTA). DCTA patients were divided into dynamic CT angiography arterial phase (DCTAa), time phase Angiography reconstruction (TMIP-CTA), and 4D noise reduction TMIP-CTA according to the image reconstruction. The region of interest was selected in the region of the pulmonary trunk and its branches, respectively. The vessel CT value and image background noise (IN) of each subgroup were also determined, and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. Simultaneously two radiologists performed a subjective evaluation of the quality of the picture images.
resultsThe DCTA group had a lower contrast dose than the SCAT group, but the vessel CT value, IN, CNR, and SNR were significantly higher in the DCTA group compared with the SCTA group. CT of the vascular lumen was generally higher in all subgroups of DCTA than in SCTA, with the highest in the TMIP-CIA group. IN was significantly higher in both the DCTAa and TMIP-CTA groups than in the SCTA group. SNR and CNR were elevated in TMIP-CTA and 4D noise reduction TMIP-CTA compared to the SCTA group. In addition, the subjective image quality scores of the DCTA group were significantly higher than those of SCTA, and the 4D noise reduction TMIP-CTA had the most. However, the ED of the SCTA group was lower than that of the DCTA group.
conclusion4D noise reduction TMIP-CTA based on DCTA reconstruction significantly improves the quality of pulmonary artery CTPA images and increases the clinical diagnostic rate, with potential for clinical dissemination.
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.