CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT04939688ULD-CRANEUpdated Mar 10, 2025

Concordance Between Ultra-low Dose (ULD) and Standard Dose CT Scans in the Search for Traumatic Brain Injury

An interventional study of Conventional dose AND ultra low-dose CT scanning in the search for cranial lesions in Head Injuries, Penetrating and Head Injuries, Closed, sponsored by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes. Terminated at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-10.

Sponsored by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Why this study was terminated
Recruitment difficulties
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
2
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this research is to evaluate the diagnostic concordance of ultra low-dose and standard dose reconstructed computed tomography acquisitions using the ADMIRE algorithm to search for intracranial lesions - both hemorrhagic and bone lesions - in trauma patients at the emergency department. The study will also evaluate the diagnostic performance of the two protocols, as well as the speed of image reading. For the first time, acquisitions ≤ 10 mGy (lower value than reported in the literature) will be performed with top-of-the-range scanners available in the emergency room to search for intracranial lesions. These scanners are equipped with the latest generation of ADMIRE iterative algorithms.

Read the detailed description

Head trauma is a common reason for consultation at the casualty department. The CT computed tomography scan is the standard examination leading to rapid patient management (admission to intensive care or neurosurgical management). The prevalence of traumatic lesions, intracranial bleeding or fractures, is estimated at 90% in moderate or severe head trauma patients, justifying the systematic use of a CT scan.

X-ray exposure from CT scanners is among the highest (order of May 23, 2019 for the Diagnostic Reference Levels, DRL). Radiation protection principles therefore require continuous optimization of acquisition procedures to ensure the lowest possible dose to the patient whilst maintaining satisfactory image quality for diagnosis. In recent years, technological innovations have been developed to optimize the dose delivered to the scanner, such as iterative reconstructions. Numerous studies on image quality and anthropomorphic phantoms and on cadavers have been performed at the imaging department of Nîmes University Hospital. Subsequently, feasibility studies have been conducted on patients, highlighting the use of the ultra low-dose scanner to detect common pathologies. These studies have made it possible to set up "ultra-low dose" acquisitions for several pathologies with an effective dose level close to a standard radiographic examination. These ultra low-dose acquisitions are now routinely used in our clinical practice for thoracic, spine, pelvis and proximal femurs, extremities and abdomino-pelvic explorations.

In the literature, some studies have explored the feasibility of ultra low-dose acquisitions for ear, nose and throat or skull explorations. Our study is in the context of evaluating ULD acquisitions for skull CT for traumatic intracranial lesions. The study by Corcuera-Solano et al. (2014) showed the feasibility of ULD acquisitions (Scanographic Dose Index in Volume, mean SDVI = 15.5 mGy) compared to standard acquisition (mean SDVI = 48.38 mGy) in the follow-up of a heterogeneous group of patients admitted to the neurosurgical intensive care unit, without evaluating the diagnostic performance of the two acquisitions. In this study, the Siemens scanner used was equipped with a 2nd generation iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE).

A 3rd generation algorithm has since been developed (ADMIRE) allowing an improvement in image texture, thus favoring the use of ultra low-dose acquisition for structures with lower spontaneous contrast such as the encephalon. We believe it would therefore be possible to search for intracranial lesions in trauma patients using ultra low-dose protocols, which should make it possible to reduce the doses delivered to the patient whilst maintaining sufficient image quality for diagnosis.

02

Conditions studied

03

In context

Brain Injuries

2,113 studies on the registry are indexed under Brain Injuries; 385 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 2 is below the median of 48 across 1,331 interventional studies indexed under Brain Injuries.

Browse Brain Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes is the lead sponsor of 587 studies on the registry; 96 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • All patients in an emergency situation with a head trauma requiring a scan, i.e. moderate or severe skull trauma, Group 1 or 2 according to the Brain Trauma Task Force classification (Guidelines for management of severe head injury. J Neurotrauma 2000 ; 17 : 507-11) as described by P. Schoettker et al. 2001).
  • Patient with an isolated skull trauma or polytraumatized patient including skull trauma.
  • Patient capable of giving informed consent or for whom a person of confidence or legal representative / family member has given informed consent and signed the consent form on the patient's behalf if the patient has been included in an emergency.
  • Patients affiliated to or beneficiary of a health insurance scheme.
  • All adult patients aged 18 or over.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients already taking part in another study for which it is not allowed to participate in other clinical studies.
  • Patients in an exclusion period determined by another study.
  • Patients who are pregnant, breastfeeding or about to give birth.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
2 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Patients requiring a CT scan in the search for cranial lesions following head trauma

    All patients will undergo both conventional dose AND ultra low-dose CT scans in the search for cranial lesions following head trauma.

    Radiation: Conventional dose AND ultra low-dose CT scanning in the search for cranial lesions

Interventions

  • RadiationConventional dose AND ultra low-dose CT scanning in the search for cranial lesions

    As well as undergoing the usual, conventional radiation dose CT scan, these patients will also undergo ultra low-dose CT scanning in the search for cranial lesions.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Presence of at least one extradural hematoma found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  2. Presence of at least one extradural hematoma found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  3. Presence of at least one subarachnoid hemorrhage found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  4. Presence of at least one subarachnoid hemorrhage found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  5. Presence of at least one subdural hematoma found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  6. Presence of at least one subdural hematoma found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  7. Presence of at least one intraparenchymal hemorrhage found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  8. Presence of at least one intraparenchymal hemorrhage found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

Secondary outcomes

  1. A. Presence of at least one bone lesion in the skull, arch or face found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  2. A. Presence of at least one bone lesion in the skull, arch or face found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  3. B. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  4. B. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  5. C. Presence of at least one cranial bone lesion found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  6. C. Presence of at least one cranial bone lesion found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  7. D. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion found on the standard dose CT-scan according to the radiologist.

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  8. D. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan according to the radiologist.

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  9. E. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion found on the standard dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  10. E. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion found on the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  11. Fi.Radiologist's appreciation of the standard dose CT-scan: image quality

    A scale of 1 - 4 will be used (1 = interpretable, 2 = interpretable despite a slight technical problem (centering, movement, constants) 3 = completely interpretable despite a slight technical problem, 4 = no technical problems)

    Time frame: Day 0

  12. Fi.Radiologist's appreciation of the ultra low-dose CT-scan: image quality

    A scale of 1 - 4 will be used (1 = interpretable, 2 = interpretable despite a slight technical problem (centering, movement, constants) 3 = completely interpretable despite a slight technical problem, 4 = no technical problems)

    Time frame: Day 0

  13. Fii.Radiologist's appreciation of the standard dose CT-scan: diagnostic quality

    A scale of 1 - 5 will be used (1 = unacceptable, 2 = sub-optimal, 3 = acceptable, 4 = above average, 5 = excellent)

    Time frame: Day 0

  14. Fii.Radiologist's appreciation of the ultra low-dose CT-scan: diagnostic quality

    A scale of 1 - 5 will be used A scale of 1 - 5 will be used (1 = unacceptable, 2 = sub-optimal, 3 = acceptable, 4 = above average, 5 = excellent)

    Time frame: Day 0

  15. Fiii.Radiologist's appreciation of the standard dose CT-scan: level of confidence

    A scale of 1 - 5 will be used (1 = very poor, 2 = poor, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, 5 = excellent)

    Time frame: Day 0

  16. Fiii.Radiologist's appreciation of the ultra low-dose CT-scan: level of confidence

    A scale of 1 - 5 will be used (1 = very poor, 2 = poor, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, 5 = excellent)

    Time frame: Day 0

  17. G. Total dose of X-rays delivered with the standard dose CT-scan : DLP

    DACS (Dose Archiving and Communication System) will be used to measure Dose Length Product (DLP) measured in mGy\*cm

    Time frame: Day 0

  18. G. Total dose of X-rays delivered with the ultra low-dose CT-scan : DLP

    DACS (Dose Archiving and Communication System) will be used to measure Dose Length Product (DLP) measured in mGy\*cm

    Time frame: Day 0

  19. G. Total dose of X-rays delivered with the standard dose CT-scan : CTDI

    DACS (Dose Archiving and Communication System) will be used to measure Computed Tomography Dose Index in mGy

    Time frame: Day 0

  20. G. Total dose of X-rays delivered with the ultra low-dose CT-scan : CTDI

    DACS (Dose Archiving and Communication System) will be used to measure Computed Tomography Dose Index in mGy

    Time frame: Day 0

  21. H. Interpretation time with the standard dose CT-scan

    The time taken to interpret the images will be measured in minutes

    Time frame: Day 0

  22. H. Interpretation time with the ultra low-dose CT-scan

    The time taken to interpret the images will be measured in minutes

    Time frame: Day 0

  23. I. Performance of standard dose CT-scan for polytrauma patients. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion.

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  24. I. Performance of the ultra low-dose CT-scan for patients with skull trauma alone. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  25. I. General performance of the ultra low-dose CT-scan for polytrauma patients: Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

  26. I. General performance of the standard dose CT-scan for patients with skull trauma alone. Presence of at least one intracranial hemorrhagic lesion and presence of at least one bone lesion

    YES/NO

    Time frame: Day 0

Other outcomes

  1. Patient's age

    In years

    Time frame: Day 0

  2. Patient's weight

    In kilos

    Time frame: Day 0

  3. Patient's height

    In cm

    Time frame: Day 0

  4. Patient's Body Mass Index

    The patient's Body Mass Index will be calculated by computer according to the patient's weight and height (in Kg/m²)

    Time frame: Day 0

  5. Type of trauma

    The type of trauma will be recorded

    Time frame: Day 0

  6. Circumstances of trauma

    The circumstances of the trauma will be recorded

    Time frame: Day 0

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Nîmes University Hospital
    Nîmes, Gard 30029, France
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Greffier J, Fernandez A, Macri F, Freitag C, Metge L, Beregi JP. Which dose for what image? Iterative reconstruction for CT scan. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013 Nov;94(11):1117-21. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2013.03.008. Epub 2013 Jun 22. PubMed 23796396 ↗
  • Greffier J, Macri F, Larbi A, Fernandez A, Khasanova E, Pereira F, Mekkaoui C, Beregi JP. Dose reduction with iterative reconstruction: Optimization of CT protocols in clinical practice. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2015 May;96(5):477-86. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2015.02.007. Epub 2015 Mar 19. PubMed 25797211 ↗
  • Larbi A, Orliac C, Frandon J, Pereira F, Ruyer A, Goupil J, Macri F, Beregi JP, Greffier J. Detection and characterization of focal liver lesions with ultra-low dose computed tomography in neoplastic patients. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2018 May;99(5):311-320. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2017.11.003. Epub 2018 Feb 1. PubMed 29396085 ↗
  • Maas AI, Hukkelhoven CW, Marshall LF, Steyerberg EW. Prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury with computed tomographic characteristics: a comparison between the computed tomographic classification and combinations of computed tomographic predictors. Neurosurgery. 2005 Dec;57(6):1173-82; discussion 1173-82. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000186013.63046.6b. PubMed 16331165 ↗
  • Macri F, Greffier J, Pereira F, Rosa AC, Khasanova E, Claret PG, Larbi A, Gualdi G, Beregi JP. Value of ultra-low-dose chest CT with iterative reconstruction for selected emergency room patients with acute dyspnea. Eur J Radiol. 2016 Sep;85(9):1637-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.06.024. Epub 2016 Jul 1. PubMed 27501900 ↗
  • Macri F, Greffier J, Pereira FR, Mandoul C, Khasanova E, Gualdi G, Beregi JP. Ultra-low-dose chest CT with iterative reconstruction does not alter anatomical image quality. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2016 Nov;97(11):1131-1140. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2016.06.009. Epub 2016 Jul 20. PubMed 27451261 ↗
  • Widmann G, Juranek D, Waldenberger F, Schullian P, Dennhardt A, Hoermann R, Steurer M, Gassner EM, Puelacher W. Influence of Ultra-Low-Dose and Iterative Reconstructions on the Visualization of Orbital Soft Tissues on Maxillofacial CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Aug;38(8):1630-1635. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5239. Epub 2017 Jun 8. PubMed 28596194 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 10, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04939688
Lead sponsor
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 25, 2021
Start date
Jun 26, 2021
Primary completion
Jul 19, 2021
Completion
Jul 19, 2021
Last update
Mar 10, 2025

Study contacts

Nicolas MENJEOT DE CHAMPFLEUR
principal investigator · Nîmes University Hospital

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Mar 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion