ArticleScientific reports2026
Deep-learning based image reconstruction enables reduced dose CT pulmonary angiography with non-inferior image quality.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
To investigate whether a CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) protocol with reduced radiation dose and deep-learning based image reconstruction (DLIR) is non-inferior in image quality to standard-dose CTPA using iterative reconstruction. A phantom study was conducted to estimate the additional radiation dose reduction enabled by high-strength deep learning-based image reconstruction (DLIR-H) compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR-V 90%). Medium and large phantoms were used to simulate different body sizes. Subsequently, we reduced radiation dose of our clinical CTPA protocol and transitioned to DLIR for image reconstruction. We retrospectively analyzed 307 consecutive patients who were examined before (n = 152) and after (n = 155) this clinically driven change in the CTPA protocol. Objective image quality was quantified and subjective image quality was rated by two radiologists. The non-inferiority margin was pre-specified as a < 5% difference in image quality parameters. In the phantom, DLIR-H allowed radiation dose to be reduced by up to 71% with equivalent or higher signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) compared to standard-dose examinations reconstructed with ASiR-V 90%. In the patient cohort, radiation dose was reduced by 41% (median DLP 116 vs. 68 mGy*cm; effective dose 1.69 vs. 0.99 mSv, p < 0.001). In the modified protocol, median SNR was superior for the central pulmonary artery (13.6 vs. 22.3) and non-inferior for the segmental pulmonary arteries (16.4 vs. 16.8). Subjective image quality averaged over both readers was superior with the modified protocol. Compared to state-of-the-art iterative reconstruction, DLIR allows radiation dose for CTPA to be reduced by an additional 41% with non-inferior image quality.
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.