Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40940572›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Virtual monochromatic versus conventional polychromatic CT images in patients with acute bowel ischaemia.

Kilian Rothenbuehler, Ahmad Sayadi, Renaud Troxler, Christine Sempoux, Alban Denys, David Rotzinger, Sabine Schmidt

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Kilian RothenbuehlerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Ahmad SayadiDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Renaud TroxlerDepartment of Medical Imaging, Riviera Chablais Hospital, Rennaz, Switzerland.
Christine SempouxDepartment of Pathology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Alban DenysDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
David RotzingerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sabine SchmidtDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland. sabine.schmidt@chuv.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2631-3032

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare 40 keV virtual monochromatic images (VMIs) with conventionally acquired polychromatic multi-detector CT images (CONV) in patients with acute bowel ischaemia (ABI). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively included 48 consecutive patients (38 males, mean age 69 years) with pathologically proven ABI over 40 months. They underwent portovenous dual-energy multi-detector CT followed by surgery within < 48 h. Nineteen patients had VMIs, and 29 had CONV after non-enhanced acquisition. After dividing the small and large bowel into 10 segments, two radiologists blinded to the exact localisation of the ABI read the VMIs and CONV images separately. After this qualitative analysis, bowel wall density was assessed quantitatively on (virtual) non-enhanced and portovenous images.

resultsQualitative analysis showed good overall sensitivity (75.9-82%) and specificity (85.9-88.7%) for localising ABI on VMIs and CONV images without significant differences. Inter-observer agreement was important or near perfect (kappa 0.61-0.83). Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences in wall density between healthy and pathological bowel segments for nearly all VMIs and CONV images, not only when analysing the (virtual) non-enhanced and portovenous phases separately, but also when subtracting wall density (portovenous minus (virtual) non-enhanced phase). Wall density delta (healthy minus pathological wall) showed no significant differences between VMIs and CONV images.

conclusionVMIs and CONV images had good diagnostic value and important inter-reader agreement for localising ABI using (virtual) non-enhanced and portovenous phases, without significant qualitative or quantitative differences. Therefore, we can rely on the virtual non-enhanced phase instead of additionally acquiring a non-enhanced phase, enabling considerable dose reduction. KEY POINTS: Question Can we rely on virtual monochromatic CT images to detect reduced or absent bowel wall enhancement in acute bowel ischaemia? Findings Virtual monochromatic CT images have equal diagnostic value for detecting acute bowel ischaemia as conventionally acquired polychromatic CT images without significant qualitative or quantitative differences. Clinical relevance Significant differences in bowel wall density between healthy and pathological segments on subtraction virtual monochromatic images allow us to rely on the virtual non-enhanced phase instead of acquiring an additional non-enhanced phase in acute bowel ischaemia, leading to dose reduction.

Indexed as

IntestinesIschemiaTomography, X-Ray ComputedAcute DiseaseAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityAbdomenAcute bowel ischaemiaDiagnostic valueDual-energy computed tomographyVirtual non-enhanced phase

Identifiers

PMID40940572
PMCPMC12963216

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.