Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40815484›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2025

Photon-counting CT in maxillofacial and temporal bone CT-a comparative analysis of image quality and dose with high-end energy-integrating CT systems.

Yannik Christian Layer, Narine Mesropyan, Alexander Isaak, Dmitrij Kravchenko, Leon Bischoff, Claus C Pieper, Patrick Kupczyk, Julian A Luetkens, Benjamin P Ernst, Daniel Kuetting

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Photon-counting detector computed tomography for temporal bone: does higher resolution matter?Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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.

Yannik Christian Layer *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany. yannik.layer@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2379-3352
Narine Mesropyan *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Alexander IsaakDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Dmitrij KravchenkoDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Leon BischoffDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Claus C PieperDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Patrick KupczykDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Julian A LuetkensDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Benjamin P ErnstDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Daniel KuettingDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis experimental study aimed to compare the image quality of maxillofacial and temporal bone imaging using different radiation dose settings on current high-end CT systems: photon-counting detector CT (PCDCT), dual-source energy-integrating detector CT (DECT), and dual-layer spectral detector CT (SDCT). MATERIALS AND

methodsCT scans of a cadaveric human specimen were investigated. Temporal bone imaging was performed with the following parameters: 120 kV and A (high-dose): 140-100 mAs; B (middle-dose): 90-60 mAs; C (low-dose): 50-25 mAs; D (ultra-low-dose): 20-10 mAs. Similarly, for maxillofacial CT: 100 kV and A: 100-80 mAs; B: 70-50 mAs; C: 40-25 mAs; D: 20-10 mAs. Region of interest (ROI)-based noise, SNR, and CNR ratios were calculated for objective assessment of image quality. Subjectively, image quality (IQ) of important anatomic landmarks was assessed using a Likert grading scale from 1 (non-diagnostic) to 5 (excellent).

resultsFor temporal bone, PCDCT provided excellent-to-good IQ up to low-dose scans for all anatomical landmarks, which was superior to SDCT (excellent-to-sufficient), followed by DECT (good-to-poor): e.g., for C: 4.3 ± 0.5 versus 3.7 ± 0.6 versus 2.9 ± 0.6, p < 0.001. PCDCT had significantly better IQ compared to SDCT in ultra-low-dose settings (D: 3.9 ± 0.4 versus 2.8 ± 0.4, p < 0.001). For maxillofacial CT, no significant differences in IQ were found between all CT systems using high- and middle-dose scans, e.g., B: 3.9 ± 0.5 versus 3.8 ± 0.7 versus 3.8 ± 0.4 (p = 0.81). In low- and ultra-low-dose settings, IQ was similar by PCDCT and SDCT (C: p = 0.17; D: p = 0.99) and superior to that of DECT (C: p < 0.05).

conclusionPCDCT offers excellent image quality for temporal bone and maxillofacial CT even at ultra-low doses; results were, in some cases, superior to SDCT and DECT. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: As PCDCT outperformed modern DECT and SDCT in assessment of maxillofacial and temporal bone CT for image quality and radiation dose, our study suggests that the implementation of PCDCT will improve image quality while reducing radiation exposure in general population. KEY POINTS: This work compares the quality of maxillofacial and temporal bone imaging in PCDCT, DECT, and SDCT. Scans of a cadaveric human specimen were investigated using different radiation doses. PCDCT offers excellent image quality for temporal bone and maxillofacial CT. PCDCT, SDCT, and DECT all showed good image quality overall.

Indexed as

Facial BonesRadiation DosageTemporal BoneTomography, X-Ray ComputedCadaverHumansPhotonsComputed tomographyDose reductionMaxillofacial CTPhoton-counting detector CTTemporal bone

Identifiers

PMID40815484
PMCPMC12356771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.