ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Diagnostic performance of lumbar spine CT using deep learning denoising to evaluate disc herniation and spinal stenosis.
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 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.
- Clinical Utility of AI-Enabled CT-to-MRI Translation for Degenerative Spinal Disorders: A Retrospective Reader Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Intelligence Architectures and Machine Learning Applications in Contemporary Spine Care.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of lumbar spine CT using deep learning denoising (DLD CT) for detecting disc herniation and spinal stenosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 47 patients (229 intervertebral discs from L1/2 to L5/S1; 18 men and 29 women; mean age, 69.1 ± 10.9 years) who underwent lumbar spine CT and MRI within 1 month. CT images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP) and denoised using a deep learning algorithm (ClariCT.AI). Three radiologists independently evaluated standard CT and DLD CT at an 8-week interval for the presence of disc herniation, central canal stenosis, and neural foraminal stenosis. Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence were also assessed using five-point Likert scales. Standard CT and DLD CT were compared using MRI as a reference standard.
resultsDLD CT showed higher sensitivity (60% (70/117) vs. 44% (51/117); p < 0.001) and similar specificity (94% (534/570) vs. 94% (538/570); p = 0.465) for detecting disc herniation. Specificity for detecting spinal canal stenosis and neural foraminal stenosis was higher in DLD CT (90% (487/540) vs. 86% (466/540); p = 0.003, 94% (1202/1272) vs. 92% (1171/1272); p < 0.001), while sensitivity was comparable (81% (119/147) vs. 77% (113/147); p = 0.233, 83% (85/102) vs. 81% (83/102); p = 0.636). Image quality and diagnostic confidence were superior for DLD CT (all comparisons, p < 0.05).
conclusionCompared to standard CT, DLD CT can improve diagnostic performance in detecting disc herniation and spinal stenosis with superior image quality and diagnostic confidence. KEY POINTS: Question The accurate diagnosis of disc herniation and spinal stenosis is limited on lumbar spine CT because of the low soft-tissue contrast. Findings Lumbar spine CT using deep learning denoising (DLD CT) demonstrated superior diagnostic performance in detecting disc herniation and spinal stenosis compared to standard CT. Clinical relevance DLD CT can be used as a simple and cost-effective screening test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40483292What 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.