ArticleBJR open2026
Image quality and radiation dose comparison for abdominopelvic CT studies performed using photon-counting CT and dual-energy CT: a clinical study.
Article in BJR open, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT studies performed on dual-energy energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) and photo-counting CT (PCCT) for the same patient cohort with clinically aligned protocols. Methods: An IRB-approved retrospective cohort study included 49 patients who underwent portal venous phase abdominopelvic CT exams using both dual-energy CT and PCCT scanners within a maximum interval of 3 months. Images reconstructed included virtual monoenergetic images at 50, 60, and 70 keV and mixed images. CTDI Results: No significant differences were observed in image quality scores between PCCT and EID-CT for most comparisons. Calculated contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were significantly higher on PCCT except for 70 keV. PCCT demonstrated a significantly lower radiation dose, with an average reduction of 20% ± 15%, up to 51%. Conclusion: For abdominopelvic CT exams with our institutional protocol settings, PCCT has demonstrated a significant reduction in radiation dose while maintaining similar image quality as EID-CT. Advances in knowledge: With clinically aligned protocols for the same cohort of patients, the results provided robust evidence for understanding the benefits of PCCT. It also provided a possible pathway to transit from EID-CT to PCCT in the abdominopelvic imaging.
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.