Peer-Reviewed Publication
PLoS One2026;21(4):e0344178.January 1, 2026Journal Article
Comparison of stationary digital chest tomosynthesis to portable chest radiographs: A patient study.
Courtney Wing1, Elias Taylor Gunnell2, Alex Billingsley3, Umer Ahmed4, Christina Inscoe5, Muthu Sakthivel1, Bryan Hoag1,6, Ertan Pamuklar1, Thad Benefield1, Jianping Lu5, Xiaohui Wang7, Otto Zhou5, Yueh Z Lee1,5
1Department of Radiology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
2Department of Radiology, The Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, United States of America.
3Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
4Department of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
5Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
6Charlotte Radiology, Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America.
7Carestream Health Inc., Rochester, New York, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Portable chest radiographs are a vital tool for clinical evaluation. However, their value remains limited due to overlapping anatomical structures obscuring underlying pathologies. Chest tomosynthesis has been proposed as an alternative to CT for high resolution chest imaging; however, a portable tomosynthesis unit is currently lacking in the standard of care. Utilizing a carbon nanotu…
Create a free account to keep reading
Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.
Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans