ArticleScientific reports2025
Improving lower-extremity artery depiction and diagnostic confidence using dual-energy technique and popliteal artery monitoring in dual-low dose CT angiography.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Impact of virtual monoenergetic images on the assessability of lower extremity arteries in (Poly-) trauma photon-counting detector CT.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- Application value of dual-energy computed tomography virtual monoenergetic images for pediatric hand angiography.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess the utility of dual-energy CT scanning (DECTs) with popliteal artery (PA) monitoring in dual low-dose (radiation and contrast) lower-extremity CT angiography (LE-CTA). 135 patients undergoing LE-CTA were prospectively included and divided into three groups of 45 each. Group-A: conventional scanning, 105 mL of contrast, abdominal aorta monitoring; Group-B: low-dose DECTs, 95 mL of contrast, AA monitoring; Group-C: low-dose DECTs, 85 mL of contrast, PA monitoring. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), as well as their elevations at seven arteries, were evaluated. Two radiologists conducted subjective assessments of overall image quality and vascular diagnosis in three arterial segments. They also recorded the visible branch grading in the lower-knee segment (LKS). Group-C reduced contrast and effective doses by 19.04% and 12.62%, respectively, compared to Group-A (P < 0.001). Group-C had the best SNR and CNR for four LKS arteries. Regarding SNR and CNR elevations, Group-C outperformed Group-B in distal arteries beyond the PA. In the LKS, Group-C performed best for subjective overall image quality, visible branch grading, and diagnostic confidence, as well as the inter-observer diagnostic consistency, followed by Group-B and Group-A (P < 0.001). DECTs with PA monitoring provides excellent depiction of lower-extremity arteries under dual low-dose conditions.
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.