Literature DB >> 20683631

MDCT appearance of the appendix: how does the low-density barium sulfate oral contrast agent affect it?

Vahid Yaghmai1, Anahita Aghaei-Lasboo, Warren M Brandwein, Sandra Tochetto, John N Mafi, Frank H Miller, Paul Nikolaidis.   

Abstract

We compared the effect of low-density barium sulfate neutral oral contrast agent on the diameter of normal appendix and its luminal content versus that of water on multidetector-row CT. CT scans of 24 patients who had been imaged on two separate occasions for the evaluation of pancreatic pathology, once with water and subsequently with low-density barium sulfate as the neutral oral contrast agent were evaluated (total of 48 scans). Studies were randomized and reviewed in consensus on a workstation in the stack mode by two radiologists blinded to the type of oral contrast. The appendix was measured at baseline and 10 days later to obtain an average diameter. Results of the water and low-density barium sulfate groups were compared using paired t test. Contents of the appendiceal lumen were also noted (gas, fluid, mixed, and collapsed appendix). The average diameter of the appendix for scans obtained with water and low-density barium sulfate was 4.09 ± 0.87 mm (median, 4.22 mm; range, 2.50-5.65 mm) and 4.13 ± 0.93 mm (median, 4 mm, range, 2.2-5.65 mm), respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.69). There was no statistically significant difference in the appendiceal content when water or low-density barium sulfate were used as oral contrast (χ (2) = 4.25, P = 0.89). Low-density barium sulfate does not affect appendiceal content or diameter and, therefore, should not adversely affect evaluation of the appendix on multidetector row CT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20683631     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-010-0894-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  15 in total

1.  Multidetector CT in small-bowel neoplasms.

Authors:  L M Minordi; A Vecchioli; P Mirk; E Filigrana; G Poloni; L Bonomo
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2007-10-21       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Added diagnostic value of multiplanar reformation of multidetector CT data in patients with suspected appendicitis.

Authors:  Hyun Cheol Kim; Dal Mo Yang; Wook Jin; Seong Jin Park
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 3.  CT enterography: concept, technique, and interpretation.

Authors:  Sandra Tochetto; Vahid Yaghmai
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  Use of water or air as oral contrast media for computed tomographic study of the gastric wall: comparison of the two techniques.

Authors:  K J Gossios; E V Tsianos; L L Demou; C K Tatsis; V P Papakostas; C N Masalas; M C Merkouropoulos; D S Kontogiannis
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1991

5.  Evaluation of bowel distention and bowel wall appearance by using neutral oral contrast agent for multi-detector row CT.

Authors:  Alec J Megibow; James S Babb; Elizabeth M Hecht; Jennie J Cho; Carmela Houston; Michael M Boruch; Archie B Williams
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-11-17       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Upper gastrointestinal tract and abdomen: water as an orally administered contrast agent for helical CT.

Authors:  T C Winter; J D Ager; H V Nghiem; R S Hill; S D Harrison; P C Freeny
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Normal enhancement of the small bowel: evaluation with spiral CT.

Authors:  K M Horton; J Eng; E K Fishman
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  Spiral CT of the abdomen after distention of small bowel loops with transparent enema in patients with Crohn's disease.

Authors:  G A Rollandi; P F Curone; E Biscaldi; F Nardi; E Bonifacino; R Conzi; L E Derchi
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec

9.  Evaluation of the effects of oral water and low-density barium sulphate suspension on bowel appearance on FDG-PET/CT.

Authors:  Michael A Blake; Bindu N Setty; Carmel G Cronin; Mannudeep Kalra; Nagaraj Setty Holalkere; Alan J Fischman; Peter R Mueller; Dushyant V Sahani
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Head-to-head comparison of oral contrast agents for cross-sectional enterography: small bowel distention, timing, and side effects.

Authors:  Brett M Young; Joel G Fletcher; Fargol Booya; Scott Paulsen; Jeff Fidler; C Daniel Johnson; James Huprich; John Barlow; Andrew Trout
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.826

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.