Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40547099›Full record

ArticleJB & JS open access

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Generated Synthetic Computed Tomography in Pediatric Spine Patients.

George E Michael, Suhas K Etigunta, Andy Liu, Meliza Perales, Cristabelle Alexander, Christopher Watterson, Daniel Hoghoughi, Norman Gellada, David L Skaggs, Kenneth D Illingworth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

George E MichaelUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9909-022X
Suhas K EtiguntaCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2946-0767
Andy LiuCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8569-0519
Meliza PeralesCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Cristabelle AlexanderCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3212-7857
Christopher WattersonCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4623-4315
Daniel HoghoughiCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4170-1556
Norman GelladaCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2122-3337
David L SkaggsCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6137-5576
Kenneth D IllingworthCedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7088-5906

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging are common imaging studies used to evaluate pediatric spine patients. Novel MRI-generated synthetic CT (sCT) images have demonstrated near equivalence in accuracy when compared with traditional CT (tCT) in cadaveric studies. This recent advancement allows potential visualization of both bony and soft tissue anatomy without harmful ionizing radiation. To date, no literature reports the use of sCT in the evaluation of pediatric spinal pathologies. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of sCT in managing pediatric and adolescent patients with various spinal conditions. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of pediatric spine patients at a quaternary care hospital from October 2023 to September 2024. Inclusion criteria included any patients receiving a sCT for spinal evaluation. Patient demographics and imaging results were collected. For any patient with traditional CT (tCT) within 3 months of the sCT (n = 10), osseous anatomical measurements on the coronal, sagittal, and axial sequences were compared (10 total measurements per scan). Official radiology reads were also compared between sCT and tCT. Results: Twenty-five patients underwent sCT of the spine (2 cervical and 23 lumbar). Indications included rule out congenital cervical anomalies in congenital muscular torticollis (2 patients), spondylolysis (13), spondylolisthesis (2), scoliosis/back pain (4), chronic back pain (4), and back pain with transitional lumbosacral anatomy (4). A total of 176 measurements of spinal osseous anatomy were performed. Comparing tCT with sCT, 62.5% of the measurements differed by less than 0.5 mm, 95.5% by less than 1 mm, and 4.5% differed by 1 mm or more. Conclusion: sCT is a radiation-free alternative imaging modality for the evaluation of the osseous spine in children. sCT provides 3-dimensional imaging of the child's bony anatomy, largely within 1 mm compared with a tCT. We believe sCT has significant clinical utility in the pediatric and adolescent population, allowing the diagnosis of both bony and soft tissue pathologies without exposing patients to radiation and using a single imaging study. Level of Evidence: Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID40547099
PMCPMC12178299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.