ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Detection of hypodense hepatic and renal lesions on abdominal CT reconstructed with deep learning image reconstruction technique in patients with large body habitus: A multi-reader study.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate detectability of hypodense hepatic and renal lesions on portal venous phase CT reconstructed with deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) versus adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V at 40% strength (ASIR-V 40) in patients with large body habitus.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included patients ≥ 90 kg who underwent abdominal CT (February- May 2021). Four reconstructions were generated: ASIR-V 40, and DLIR low (L), medium (M), and high (H) strengths. Six radiologists (three trainees, three experienced) evaluated image quality (IQ), diagnostic confidence, lesion conspicuity of up to two hypodense lesions per patient, and subcentimeter lesion visibility using a five-point Likert scale. Lesion-to-background contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was measured. Wilcoxon signed-rank and Chi-square tests were performed. Inter-reader agreement was calculated using Kendall's W.
resultsAmong the 46 patients (mean weight 117 ± 14 kg), 86 lesions (38 liver, 48 renal) were analyzed. DLIR (all strengths) outperformed ASIR-V 40 in IQ, with DLIR-H yielding highest scores for liver (4.04 ± 0.70 vs. 3.77 ± 0.68) and renal lesions (4.25 ± 0.72 vs. 3.75 ± 0.66) (p < 0.05). For liver lesions, DLIR-H improved diagnostic confidence. For renal lesions, DLIR-H improved lesion conspicuity and visibility of subcentimeter lesions. Inter-reader agreement was excellent among experienced readers and good among trainees. Quantitatively, DLIR-M and DLIR-H showed higher CNR than ASIR-V 40 for liver (6.30, 8.62 vs. 4.98) and renal lesions (13.62, 17.79 vs. 11.71) (p < 0.001).
conclusionIn patients with large body habitus, DLIR-M and -H improved IQ and CNR with DLIR-H providing superior lesion conspicuity and diagnostic confidence; this study represents one of the first evaluations of DLIR performance in this specific patient population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42406036What 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.