ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2025
Achieving single-contrast administration for enhanced chest CT and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography without compromising diagnostic quality: a comparative study.
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical value of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) combined with enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan using a single injection of contrast material in patients with breast cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study enrolled patients who underwent CESM independently as the CESM group and those who underwent CESM immediately after an enhanced CT scan as the CESM after CT group. Differences in diagnostic outcomes between the two examination methods were assessed through qualitative analysis (degree of enhancement, sign of enhancement, and image quality score) and quantitative analysis (the gray value of the lesion and background, relative degree of enhancement, and contrast-to-noise ratio values from the craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view images).
resultsWe analyzed 109 lesions from 104 patients who underwent CESM independently (CESM group) and 46 lesions from 46 patients who underwent CESM immediately after enhanced CT scan (CESM after CT group). In the qualitative analysis, the degree of enhancement, enhancement pattern, and image quality score did not significantly differ between the two groups (P = 0.443, P = 0.658, and P = 0.449, respectively) (all P > 0.05). In the quantitative analysis, mean gray value (GV) of the lesion and background from the craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view images between the two groups was (2126.779 ± 24.442, 2126.421 ± 27.731, 2077.101 ± 14.215, 2073.516 ± 7.120, 2118.149 ± 19.357, 2119.770 ± 21.951, 2076.030 ± 6.503, 2073.820 ± 8.796), mean relative degree of enhancement (RDE) from the craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view images between the two groups was (0.024 ± 0.013, 0.026 ± 0.012, 0.020 ± 0.009, 0.022 ± 0.011), mean contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) values from the craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view images between the two groups was (5.785 ± 3.370, 5.939 ± 2.600, 4.894 ± 2.342, 5.135 ± 2.426). The GV of the lesion and background, RDE, and CNR values from the craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view images did not significantly differ between the two groups (P = 0.936, P = 0.106, P = 0.648, P = 0.085, P = 0.492, P = 0.272, P = 0.782, and P = 0.563) (all P > 0.05).
conclusionCESM combined with enhanced CT scan using a single injection of contrast agent is feasible. This strategy reduces the contrast agent dose for patients requiring both examinations, further minimizing kidney damage.
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.