ArticlePeerJ2025
Feasibility of a pulsed multiphase contrast media injection protocol in head and neck computed tomography angiography: a systematic retrospective study.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Characterization and Antifungal Efficacy of NJ-62 Protein from Weizmannia coagulans CGMCC 9951 against Ceratocystis fimbriata.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and value of a pulsed multiphase contrast media injection protocol in head and neck computed tomographic angiography (CTA). Information and Methodology: A total of 522 patients who underwent head and neck CTA at the Second Hospital of Qiqihar Medical University between March 1, 2022, and March 31, 2024, were reviewed. After excluding 174 patients, 348 were included in the analysis. All scans were performed using a GE Revolution computed tomography (CT) scanner (256-row detector). In the conventional group ( Results: There were no significant differences in CT values, CNR, or SNR between the conventional and pulse groups. However, the pulse group showed significantly lower CT values in the subclavian vein (SCV) and superior vena cava (SVC) compared to the conventional group ( Conclusion: The pulsed multiphase contrast agent injection protocol improves image quality by reducing venous contrast residue while simultaneously lowering radiation exposure and contrast agent usage.
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.