Literature DB >> 10882257

Helical CT protocols for the abdomen and pelvis: a survey.

M E O'Malley1, E Halpern, P R Mueller, G S Gazelle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We surveyed members of the Society of Computed Body Tomography/Magnetic Resonance to evaluate current techniques used for helical CT in the abdomen and pelvis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey was distributed to 70 members (36 institutions) of the Society of Computed Body Tomography/Magnetic Resonance. The survey included general questions related to abdominal and pelvic helical CT and also asked the members to write a protocol for 12 hypothetical requisitions.
RESULTS: Thirty-two members (46%) responded, representing 28 institutions (78%). The number of protocols for helical CT of the abdomen and pelvis at each institution ranges from 2 to 35 (median, 11). IV contrast material is administered for 90% (median) of abdominal and pelvic CT examinations. Nonionic contrast material is used for 68% (median) of these examinations. IV contrast material is used by 100% of institutions for tumor staging protocols except for one institution that does not use IV contrast material for lymphoma staging. Fifty percent of the institutions obtain two- or three-phases of liver images for breast cancer staging. For all protocols, the average collimation and reconstruction interval is 7 mm except for renal (5 mm) and adrenal (4 mm) protocols. Rectal contrast material is administered most commonly for colon cancer staging (39% of institutions).
CONCLUSION: There is a wide range in the number of protocols used for helical CT in the abdomen and pelvis among the responding institutions. Most protocols include use of nonionic IV contrast material injected at a rate of 3 ml/sec and a collimation of 7 mm.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10882257     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.175.1.1750109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  7 in total

1.  MDCT for suspected pulmonary embolism: multi-institutional survey of 16-MDCT data acquisition protocols.

Authors:  Pamela T Johnson; David Naidich; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2006-11-29

2.  An evaluation of the use of oral contrast media in abdominopelvic CT.

Authors:  Erica Lauren Buttigieg; Karen Borg Grima; Kelvin Cortis; Sandro Galea Soler; Francis Zarb
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Computed tomography findings in diseases of the adrenal gland.

Authors:  Ersin Ozturk; H Onur Sildiroglu; Mecit Kantarci; Selim Doganay; Fadime Güven; Mahmut Bozkurt; Guner Sonmez; C Cinar Basekim
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.704

4.  Optimised z-axis coverage at multidetector-row CT in adults suspected of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  N Brassart; C Winant; D Tack; P A Gevenois; V De Maertelaer; C Keyzer
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 5.  Differentiating a chronic hyperplastic mass from pancreatic cancer: a challenge remaining in multidetector CT of the pancreas.

Authors:  Daniel T Boll; Elmar M Merkle
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.034

6.  Multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of adnexal mass: is unenhanced CT scan necessary?

Authors:  Sung Il Jung; Hee Sun Park; Young Jun Kim; Hae Jeong Jeon
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.500

7.  The role of unenhanced phase of the liver in the scanning protocol of metastatic breast cancer: implications for sensitivity, response evaluation and size measurement.

Authors:  Juan José Arenas-Jiménez; Elena García-Garrigós; Mariana Cecilia Planells-Alduvín
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2021-11-19       Impact factor: 2.991

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.