ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
Effects of recumbency and tube current on image quality of canine elbow computed tomography.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Elbow dysplasia is a leading cause of forelimb lameness in medium- to large-breed dogs, and computed tomography (CT) is the imaging modality of choice for assessment of the medial coronoid process. Image quality depends on patient positioning and tube current, but their effects have not been systematically compared. Aims: To compare the image quality of two canine elbow CT positioning protocols (dorsal recumbency: head in neutral position, both elbows scanned together vs. lateral recumbency: head/neck flexed caudally, elbows scanned separately), and to evaluate the influence of tube current and its interaction with these protocols. Methods: Prospective experimental cadaver study on twenty canine cadavers (40 elbows). All cadavers were scanned in both positions at 150 mA; a subgroup of eight was additionally scanned at 300 mA. Quantitative outcomes were signal- and contrast-to-noise ratios in bone- and soft-tissue-kernels. Qualitative outcomes, assessed by three observers, were paired-preference reads of four criteria: bone conspicuity, soft-tissue conspicuity, and artifacts in bone- and soft-tissue window. Inter- and intra-observer agreement were quantified for the bone conspicuity criterion. Results: Lateral recumbency produced significantly higher signal- and contrast-to-noise ratios than dorsal recumbency for all four outcomes (all Conclusion: Lateral recumbency, scanning the elbows separately with head and neck flexed caudally, provides superior objective image quality, and increased tube current does not compensate for suboptimal positioning. The observer-perceived advantage for bone conspicuity was inconsistent. For routine orthopedic CT focused on the medial coronoid process, dorsal recumbency remains a reasonable choice; lateral recumbency should be preferred when artifact reduction or soft-tissue evaluation is clinically important.
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.