ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
Evaluation of virtual non-contrast detector-based spectral CT images in comparison to true unenhanced images in 20 rabbits.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of Virtual Non-Contrast Images Generated by Spectral Detector Computed Tomography and Conventional Computed Tomography Images of Histologically Confirmed Hepatic Pathologies in 28 Dogs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Spectral detector computed tomography imaging of histologically confirmed splenic pathologies in 30 canine patients: a comparison of virtual non-contrast images and true unenhanced images.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Spectral detector Computed Tomography (SDCT) enables generation of virtual non-contrast (VNC) images derived from a post-contrast scan, as previously investigated in healthy dogs. This technique is especially promising for awake scanned rabbits where motion between the pre- and the post-contrast scans makes comparison challenging. This study aimed to determine the reliability of VNC images for assessing abdominal organs in 20 rabbits by evaluating their qualitative and quantitative parameters compared to true unenhanced (TUE) images. Our hypothesis were that the VNC series would be comparable to TUE series and that the quality of the VNC images would be equal to or even superior to the native images. Methods: Attenuation values of VNC and TUE series were assessed using a two one-sided t-test (TOST) and the signal-to-noise ratio was calculated for each ROI in the different series. Additionally, a qualitative assessment of the VNC images relative to TUE images was performed in consensus by a board-certified radiologist and a second year diagnostic imaging resident by evaluating the iodine subtraction, image quality and noise of VNC images based on a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 219 regions of interest (ROIs) where drawn in abdominal organs. 72.1% of the ROIs displayed differences of less than 15 Hounsfield Units (HU) between TUE and VNC images. The differences in attenuation values of TUE and VNC were statistically significant ( Discussion: VNC images present a promising alternative to TUE images for abdominal organs without pathology in rabbits with the benefit of eliminating motion between the compared series and reducing examination time and radiation exposure by replacing pre-contrast scans. Further research is necessary to demonstrate the applicability of the technique to morphologically diseased organs.
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.