*SmartCT is 510(k) pending in the U.S.A. Not available for sales in the U.S.A
** As described in the SmartCT Instructions for Use
1. Medtech 360 2016-2019, Millennium Research Group
2. Schernthaner RE et al, Feasibility of a Modified Cone-Beam CT Rotation Trajectory to Improve Liver Periphery Visualization during Transarterial Chemoembolization, Radiology. 2015; 277(3):833–4.
3. Loffroy R, et al. Comparing the detectability of hepatocellular carcinoma by C-arm dual-phase cone-beam computed tomography during hepatic arteriography with conventional contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(1):97-104.
4. Chiaradia et al, J J,Sensitivity and Reproducibility of AFD Software for HCC, Vasc Interv Radiol 2018;29:425-431.
5. Miyayama S, et al. Identification of small hepatocellular carcinoma and tumour-feeding branches with cone-beam CT guidance technology during transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013; 24(4):501-8.
6. Trunz L. et al, Investigation of Radiation Dose Estimates and Image Quality Between Commercially Available Interventional Fluoroscopy Systems for Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures, Academic Radiology, in press, 2020
7. Levi E.B. et al, First Human Experience with Directly Image-able Iodinated Embolization Microbeads, Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, vol 39, issue 8, 1177-1186, 2016
8. Floridi C et al, Percutaneous needle biopsy of mediastinal masses under C-arm conebeam CT guidance: diagnostic performance and safety, Medical Onocology, 2017; 34(4): 1-7
9. Abi-jaoudeh et al , Cone Beam vs Conventional CT Navigation for Image-Guided Biopsy, J VascIntervRadio; 2016; 27: 1342–1349.
10. Percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy of small (1 cm) lung nodules under C-arm cone-beam CT virtual navigation guidance; Ji Yung Choo Eur Radiol; 2013; 23:712–719.
11. Philips whitepaper 4522 991 30501; Reduction of procedure time by 17% with Philips Azurion in independent verified study. Results are specific to the institution where they were obtained and may not reflect the results achievable at other institutions.
12. In 18 individual comparative studies, Philips ClarityIQ was associated with reductions in patient radiation exposure. For the full list of clinical peer-reviewed papers go to www.philips.co.uk/healthcare/resources/landing/alluraclarity-clinically-proven
The results of the application of dose reduction techniques will vary depending on the clinical task, patient size, anatomical location and clinical practice. The interventional radiologist assisted by a physicist as necessary has to determine the appropriate settings for each specific clinical task. Results based on DSA dose area product per frame from a single center prospective randomized study on 48 patients. DSA runs for Allura Xper with ClarityIQ and Allura Xper without ClarityIQ were randomly acquired on the same patient under same condition of geometry, field of view and injection protocol. Image quality was based on subjective assessment (side-by-side, equal or superior than the other, blinded review by 5 independent radiologists).