ArticleJournal of imaging2024
Quantitative Comparison of Color-Coded Parametric Imaging Technologies Based on Digital Subtraction and Digital Variance Angiography: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2024. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The evaluation of hemodynamic conditions in critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients is inevitable in endovascular interventions. In this study, the performance of color-coded digital subtraction angiography (ccDSA) and the recently developed color-coded digital variance angiography (ccDVA) was compared in the assessment of key time parameters in lower extremity interventions. The observational study included 19 CLTI patients who underwent peripheral vascular intervention at our institution in 2020. Pre- and post-dilatational images were retrospectively processed and analyzed by a commercially available ccDSA software (Kinepict Medical Imaging Tool 6.0.3; Kinepict Health Ltd., Budapest, Hungary) and by the recently developed ccDVA technology. Two protocols were applied using both a 4 and 7.5 frames per second acquisition rate. Time-to-peak (TTP) parameters were determined in four pre- and poststenotic regions of interest (ROI), and ccDVA values were compared to ccDSA read-outs. The ccDVA technology provided practically the same TTP values as ccDSA (r = 0.99, R
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.