ArticleNeuroradiology2025
Accelerated flat panel computed tomography for pre-operative temporal bone imaging: Image quality and dosimetry comparison to conventional high resolution multislice computed tomography.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHigh-resolution multislice CT (HR-MSCT) and cone beam CT (CBCT) are commonly used for preoperative temporal bone imaging, with HR-MSCT often preferred due to its shorter scan duration and lower susceptibility to motion artifacts. However, recent advancements in accelerated flat panel CT (Acc-FPCT) available with the latest generation angiography systems have addressed traditional limitations of CBCT by significantly decreasing scan time. This cadaver-based study evaluates the diagnostic performance and radiation dose of Acc-FPCT compared to HR-MSCT in preoperative temporal bone imaging.
methodsSix different Acc-FPCT protocols were acquired on five whole-head cadaveric specimens (ten temporal bones). Three neuroradiologists experienced in temporal bone imaging assessed the image quality of Acc-FPCT protocols in comparison to that of HR-MSCT for the visualization of 31 landmarks of middle and inner ear using a 5-point Likert scale. We also compared radiation dose parameters (CT dose index and dose length product) among the protocols.
resultsTwo high-Resolution Acc-FPCT protocols were found to be superior to HR-MSCT by all raters (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two HR-FPCT protocols (p = 0.25). The remaining Acc-FPCT protocols were rated significantly inferior to HR-MSCT. The inter-rater reliability was excellent (ICC (2,k) = 0.925; CI [0.92-0.93]). The dose length product was significantly lower in all Acc-FPCT protocols compared to HR-MSCT.
conclusionThe results of our cadaver-based study highlight the utility of certain Acc-FPCT protocols as a viable alternative to HR-MSCT in preoperative temporal bone imaging, improving the visualization of critical anatomical landmarks without increasing radiation exposure.
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.