Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient
Purpose To compare dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) aortography using a 70% reduced iodine dose to single-energy CT (SECT) aortography using a standard iodine dose in the same patient. Methods Twenty-one patients with a prior SECT aortography using standard iodine dose had DECT aortography usi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Abdominal imaging 2017-03, Vol.42 (3), p.759-765 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 765 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 759 |
| container_title | Abdominal imaging |
| container_volume | 42 |
| creator | Shuman, William P. O’Malley, Ryan B. Busey, Janet M. Ramos, Mario M. Koprowicz, Kent M. |
| description | Purpose
To compare dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) aortography using a 70% reduced iodine dose to single-energy CT (SECT) aortography using a standard iodine dose in the same patient.
Methods
Twenty-one patients with a prior SECT aortography using standard iodine dose had DECT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose. Section 120 kVp images were compared to DECT images reconstructed at both 50 and 77 keV. Reviewers measured image noise and attenuation in the aorta at eight locations from proximal to distal and subjectively scored vascular enhancement on a four-point scale. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The volume CT dose index (CTDI
vol
) for each exam was recorded.
Results
Mean iodine dose was 50 g for SECT and 15 g for DECT (70% reduction). Mean aortic attenuation was similar for section 120 kVp (350 ± 67 HU) and DECT 50 keV (338 ± 57 HU,
p
= 0.547) but was lower at 77 keV (152 ± 23 HU). Measured image noise was greatest at 50 keV (12 ± 5 HU) and was lowest at 77 keV (7 ± 2 HU,
p
> 0.001). There was no difference in SNR or CNR between 120 kVp and 50 keV (
p
> 0.05). Mean subjective vascular enhancement scores for SECT were between good and excellent (3.33–3.69), and for DECT at 50 keV were between moderate and good (2.54–2.93,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1861471358</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4320913017</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-f613ea307a5c2c1e64be912d56ab8472298574ef3aa22db849afd15f5f3668f53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kV1rHCEUhqW0NCHND-hNEUqhN9N4HHXcy7KkHxBoLhLInbjjcWOY0anOBDb_p_-zLpuGttBeKfq8r3IeQl4D-wCMdWeFMa6gYaAaYAKah2fkmLdKNYxJ_fxpL26OyGkpd4xVUgJw-ZIccc20kEIckx-XOZUJ-zncI-3TONkcSoo0eeoWOzQYMW93dH1Fbcpz2mY73e7oUkLc0o69oxnd0qOjIbkQkbpUkN5jLkuhe2bA_zaU2UZn85_xEOl8i7TYEelk54BxfkVeeDsUPH1cT8j1p_Or9Zfm4tvnr-uPF00vWj03XkGLtmWdlT3vAZXY4Aq4k8putOg4X2nZCfSttZy7erSy3oH00tdZaS_bE_L-0Dvl9H3BMpsxlB6HwUZMSzGgFYgOWqkr-vYv9C4tOdbfVarTTGgtVKXgQPV1zCWjN1MOo807A8zsNZqDRlPlmL1G81Azbx6bl82I7inxS1oF-AEo9SpuMf_29D9bfwJldaqF</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1878048846</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Shuman, William P. ; O’Malley, Ryan B. ; Busey, Janet M. ; Ramos, Mario M. ; Koprowicz, Kent M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shuman, William P. ; O’Malley, Ryan B. ; Busey, Janet M. ; Ramos, Mario M. ; Koprowicz, Kent M.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To compare dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) aortography using a 70% reduced iodine dose to single-energy CT (SECT) aortography using a standard iodine dose in the same patient.
Methods
Twenty-one patients with a prior SECT aortography using standard iodine dose had DECT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose. Section 120 kVp images were compared to DECT images reconstructed at both 50 and 77 keV. Reviewers measured image noise and attenuation in the aorta at eight locations from proximal to distal and subjectively scored vascular enhancement on a four-point scale. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The volume CT dose index (CTDI
vol
) for each exam was recorded.
Results
Mean iodine dose was 50 g for SECT and 15 g for DECT (70% reduction). Mean aortic attenuation was similar for section 120 kVp (350 ± 67 HU) and DECT 50 keV (338 ± 57 HU,
p
= 0.547) but was lower at 77 keV (152 ± 23 HU). Measured image noise was greatest at 50 keV (12 ± 5 HU) and was lowest at 77 keV (7 ± 2 HU,
p
> 0.001). There was no difference in SNR or CNR between 120 kVp and 50 keV (
p
> 0.05). Mean subjective vascular enhancement scores for SECT were between good and excellent (3.33–3.69), and for DECT at 50 keV were between moderate and good (2.54–2.93,
p
< 0.0001). CTDI
vol
was 13.6 mGy for SECT and 13.1 mGy for DECT (
p
= 0.637).
Conclusion
70% Reduced iodine DECT aortography may result in similar aortic attenuation, CNR, SNR, and lower although acceptable subjective image scores when compared to standard iodine SECT aortography in the same patient.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2366-004X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2366-0058</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28084544</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aortic Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging ; Aortic Aneurysm - surgery ; Computed Tomography Angiography - methods ; Contrast Media - administration & dosage ; Female ; Gastroenterology ; Hepatology ; Humans ; Imaging ; Iohexol - administration & dosage ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted ; Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection ; Radiology ; Signal-To-Noise Ratio ; Triiodobenzoic Acids - administration & dosage</subject><ispartof>Abdominal imaging, 2017-03, Vol.42 (3), p.759-765</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017</rights><rights>Abdominal Radiology is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-f613ea307a5c2c1e64be912d56ab8472298574ef3aa22db849afd15f5f3668f53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-f613ea307a5c2c1e64be912d56ab8472298574ef3aa22db849afd15f5f3668f53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28084544$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shuman, William P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Malley, Ryan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Busey, Janet M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramos, Mario M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koprowicz, Kent M.</creatorcontrib><title>Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient</title><title>Abdominal imaging</title><addtitle>Abdom Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Abdom Radiol (NY)</addtitle><description>Purpose
To compare dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) aortography using a 70% reduced iodine dose to single-energy CT (SECT) aortography using a standard iodine dose in the same patient.
Methods
Twenty-one patients with a prior SECT aortography using standard iodine dose had DECT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose. Section 120 kVp images were compared to DECT images reconstructed at both 50 and 77 keV. Reviewers measured image noise and attenuation in the aorta at eight locations from proximal to distal and subjectively scored vascular enhancement on a four-point scale. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The volume CT dose index (CTDI
vol
) for each exam was recorded.
Results
Mean iodine dose was 50 g for SECT and 15 g for DECT (70% reduction). Mean aortic attenuation was similar for section 120 kVp (350 ± 67 HU) and DECT 50 keV (338 ± 57 HU,
p
= 0.547) but was lower at 77 keV (152 ± 23 HU). Measured image noise was greatest at 50 keV (12 ± 5 HU) and was lowest at 77 keV (7 ± 2 HU,
p
> 0.001). There was no difference in SNR or CNR between 120 kVp and 50 keV (
p
> 0.05). Mean subjective vascular enhancement scores for SECT were between good and excellent (3.33–3.69), and for DECT at 50 keV were between moderate and good (2.54–2.93,
p
< 0.0001). CTDI
vol
was 13.6 mGy for SECT and 13.1 mGy for DECT (
p
= 0.637).
Conclusion
70% Reduced iodine DECT aortography may result in similar aortic attenuation, CNR, SNR, and lower although acceptable subjective image scores when compared to standard iodine SECT aortography in the same patient.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm - surgery</subject><subject>Computed Tomography Angiography - methods</subject><subject>Contrast Media - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Iohexol - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Signal-To-Noise Ratio</subject><subject>Triiodobenzoic Acids - administration & dosage</subject><issn>2366-004X</issn><issn>2366-0058</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kV1rHCEUhqW0NCHND-hNEUqhN9N4HHXcy7KkHxBoLhLInbjjcWOY0anOBDb_p_-zLpuGttBeKfq8r3IeQl4D-wCMdWeFMa6gYaAaYAKah2fkmLdKNYxJ_fxpL26OyGkpd4xVUgJw-ZIccc20kEIckx-XOZUJ-zncI-3TONkcSoo0eeoWOzQYMW93dH1Fbcpz2mY73e7oUkLc0o69oxnd0qOjIbkQkbpUkN5jLkuhe2bA_zaU2UZn85_xEOl8i7TYEelk54BxfkVeeDsUPH1cT8j1p_Or9Zfm4tvnr-uPF00vWj03XkGLtmWdlT3vAZXY4Aq4k8putOg4X2nZCfSttZy7erSy3oH00tdZaS_bE_L-0Dvl9H3BMpsxlB6HwUZMSzGgFYgOWqkr-vYv9C4tOdbfVarTTGgtVKXgQPV1zCWjN1MOo807A8zsNZqDRlPlmL1G81Azbx6bl82I7inxS1oF-AEo9SpuMf_29D9bfwJldaqF</recordid><startdate>20170301</startdate><enddate>20170301</enddate><creator>Shuman, William P.</creator><creator>O’Malley, Ryan B.</creator><creator>Busey, Janet M.</creator><creator>Ramos, Mario M.</creator><creator>Koprowicz, Kent M.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170301</creationdate><title>Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient</title><author>Shuman, William P. ; O’Malley, Ryan B. ; Busey, Janet M. ; Ramos, Mario M. ; Koprowicz, Kent M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-f613ea307a5c2c1e64be912d56ab8472298574ef3aa22db849afd15f5f3668f53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm - surgery</topic><topic>Computed Tomography Angiography - methods</topic><topic>Contrast Media - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Iohexol - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Signal-To-Noise Ratio</topic><topic>Triiodobenzoic Acids - administration & dosage</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shuman, William P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Malley, Ryan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Busey, Janet M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramos, Mario M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koprowicz, Kent M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Abdominal imaging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shuman, William P.</au><au>O’Malley, Ryan B.</au><au>Busey, Janet M.</au><au>Ramos, Mario M.</au><au>Koprowicz, Kent M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient</atitle><jtitle>Abdominal imaging</jtitle><stitle>Abdom Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Abdom Radiol (NY)</addtitle><date>2017-03-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>759</spage><epage>765</epage><pages>759-765</pages><issn>2366-004X</issn><eissn>2366-0058</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To compare dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) aortography using a 70% reduced iodine dose to single-energy CT (SECT) aortography using a standard iodine dose in the same patient.
Methods
Twenty-one patients with a prior SECT aortography using standard iodine dose had DECT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose. Section 120 kVp images were compared to DECT images reconstructed at both 50 and 77 keV. Reviewers measured image noise and attenuation in the aorta at eight locations from proximal to distal and subjectively scored vascular enhancement on a four-point scale. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The volume CT dose index (CTDI
vol
) for each exam was recorded.
Results
Mean iodine dose was 50 g for SECT and 15 g for DECT (70% reduction). Mean aortic attenuation was similar for section 120 kVp (350 ± 67 HU) and DECT 50 keV (338 ± 57 HU,
p
= 0.547) but was lower at 77 keV (152 ± 23 HU). Measured image noise was greatest at 50 keV (12 ± 5 HU) and was lowest at 77 keV (7 ± 2 HU,
p
> 0.001). There was no difference in SNR or CNR between 120 kVp and 50 keV (
p
> 0.05). Mean subjective vascular enhancement scores for SECT were between good and excellent (3.33–3.69), and for DECT at 50 keV were between moderate and good (2.54–2.93,
p
< 0.0001). CTDI
vol
was 13.6 mGy for SECT and 13.1 mGy for DECT (
p
= 0.637).
Conclusion
70% Reduced iodine DECT aortography may result in similar aortic attenuation, CNR, SNR, and lower although acceptable subjective image scores when compared to standard iodine SECT aortography in the same patient.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>28084544</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2366-004X |
| ispartof | Abdominal imaging, 2017-03, Vol.42 (3), p.759-765 |
| issn | 2366-004X 2366-0058 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1861471358 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Aged Aortic Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging Aortic Aneurysm - surgery Computed Tomography Angiography - methods Contrast Media - administration & dosage Female Gastroenterology Hepatology Humans Imaging Iohexol - administration & dosage Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Prospective Studies Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection Radiology Signal-To-Noise Ratio Triiodobenzoic Acids - administration & dosage |
| title | Prospective comparison of dual-energy CT aortography using 70% reduced iodine dose versus single-energy CT aortography using standard iodine dose in the same patient |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T22%3A52%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prospective%20comparison%20of%20dual-energy%20CT%20aortography%20using%2070%25%20reduced%20iodine%20dose%20versus%20single-energy%20CT%20aortography%20using%20standard%20iodine%20dose%20in%20the%20same%20patient&rft.jtitle=Abdominal%20imaging&rft.au=Shuman,%20William%20P.&rft.date=2017-03-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=759&rft.epage=765&rft.pages=759-765&rft.issn=2366-004X&rft.eissn=2366-0058&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00261-016-1041-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4320913017%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1878048846&rft_id=info:pmid/28084544&rfr_iscdi=true |