ArticleRadiological physics and technology2026
Comparison between a T-tube and a spiralflow-tube to improve the visualization ability of the subclavian artery in CT angiography from the neck to the aortic arch.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare contrast media (CM) remaining in the right subclavian vein after saline flush using a conventional T-tube or a spiralflow-tube in computed tomography angiography (CTA) from the neck to the aortic arch and to evaluate the visualization ability of the right subclavian artery. A total of 71 patients who underwent CTA from the neck to the aortic arch at our institution were retrospectively included (38 in the spiralflow-tube group and 33 in the T-tube group). The volumes of CM were measured in the volume-rendered images of the right subclavian vein by setting the thresholds of 300, 500, and 1000 Hounsfield units (HU) on a three-dimensional workstation. Two reviewers evaluated the depiction of the vascular visualization of the right subclavian artery using a 5-point scale. Data are presented as median (interquartile range; Q1-Q3). The volumes of CM remaining in the right subclavian vein were significantly smaller with the spiralflow-tube group than the T-tube group at all thresholds [300 HU: 0.95 (0.33-2.08) mL vs. 3.02 (1.66-8.64) mL; 500 HU: 0.30 (0.09-0.88) mL vs. 1.60 (0.73-3.61) mL; 1000 HU: 0.07 (0.05-0.35) mL vs. 0.48 (0.18-1.28) mL; all p < 0.01]. The spiralflow-tube group showed significantly higher visualization scores for the right subclavian artery than the T-tube group [5 (4-5) vs. 4 (3-4), p < 0.01]. The saline flush using a spiralflow-tube in CTA from the neck to the aortic arch reduced CM in the right subclavian vein and improved the vascular visualization ability of the right subclavian artery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42018126What 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.