The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Differences in CT Perfusion Maps Generated by Different Commercial Software: Quantitative Analysis by Using Identical Source Data of Acute Stroke Patients
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the variability in the qualitative and quantitative results of computed tomographic (CT) perfusion imaging generated from identical source data of stroke patients by using commercially available software programs provided by various CT manufacturers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained. CT perfusion imaging data of 10 stroke patients were postprocessed by using five commercial software packages, each of which had a different algorithm: singular-value decomposition (SVD), maximum slope (MS), inverse filter (IF), box modulation transfer function (bMTF), and by using custom-made original software with standard (sSVD) and block-circulant (bSVD) SVD methods. Areas showing abnormalities in cerebral blood flow (CBF), mean transit time (MTT), and cerebral blood volume (CBV) were compared with each other and with the final infarct areas. Differences among the ratios of quantitative values in the final infarct areas and those in the unaffected side were also examined. RESULTS: The areas with CBF or MTT abnormalities and the ratios of these values significantly varied among software, while those of CBV were stable. The areas with CBF or MTT abnormalities analyzed by using SVD or bMTF corresponded to those obtained with delay-sensitive sSVD, but overestimated the final infarct area. The values obtained from software by using MS or IF corresponded well with those obtained from the delay-insensitive bSVD and the final infarct area. Given the similarities between CBF and MTT, all software were separated in two groups (ie, sSVD and bSVD). The ratios of CBF or MTTs correlated well within both groups, but not across them. CONCLUSION: CT perfusion imaging maps were significantly different among commercial software even when using identical source data, presumably because of differences in tracer-delay sensitivity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Multiphase CT Angiography: A New Tool for the Imaging Triage of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Menon, B. K., d’Esterre, C. D., Qazi, E. M., Almekhlafi, M., Hahn, L., Demchuk, A. M., & Goyal, M. (2015) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.15142256 · Cited by 699
Ko, S.-B., Park, H.-K., Kim, B. M., Heo, J. H., Rha, J.-H., Kwon, S. U., Kim, J. S., Lee, B.-C., Suh, S. H., Jung, C., et al. (2019) · Journal of Stroke · doi:10.5853/jos.2019.00024 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Kudo, K., Sasaki, M., Yamada, K., Momoshima, S., Utsunomiya, H., Shirato, H., & Ogasawara, K.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 254
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 200-209
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2001414884
- Cited by
- 332
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differences in CT Perfusion Maps Generated by Different Commercial Software: Quantitative Analysis by Using Identical Source Data of Acute Stroke Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.254082000
- The paper
- Kudo, K., Sasaki, M., Yamada, K., Momoshima, S., Utsunomiya, H., Shirato, H., & Ogasawara, K. (2010). Differences in CT Perfusion Maps Generated by Different Commercial Software: Quantitative Analysis by Using Identical Source Data of Acute Stroke Patients. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.254082000
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.