OBJECTIVES: To find a threshold body weight (BW) below 100 kg above which computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) using reduced radiation and a reduced contrast material (CM) dose provides significantly impaired quality and diagnostic confidence compared with standard-dose CTPA. METHODS: In this prospectively randomised study of 501 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and BW <100 kg, 246 were allocated into the low-dose group (80 kVp, 75 ml CM) and 255 into the normal-dose group (100 kVp, 100 ml CM). Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the pulmonary trunk was calculated. Two blinded chest radiologists independently evaluated subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence. Data were compared between the normal-dose and low-dose groups in five BW subgroups. RESULTS:Vessel attenuation did not differ between the normal-dose and low-dose groups within each BW subgroup (P = 1.0). The CNR was higher with the normal-dose compared with the low-dose protocol (P < 0.006) in all BW subgroups except for the 90-99 kg subgroup (P = 0.812). Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence did not differ between CT protocols in all subgroups (P between 0.960 and 1.0). CONCLUSIONS:Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence with 80 kVp CTPA is not different from normal-dose protocol in any BW group up to 100 kg. KEY POINTS: • 80 kVp CTPA is safe in patients weighing <100 kg • Reduced radiation and iodine dose still provide high vessel attenuation • Image quality and diagnostic confidence with low-dose CTPA is good • Diagnostic confidence does not deteriorate in obese patients weighing <100 kg.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To find a threshold body weight (BW) below 100 kg above which computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) using reduced radiation and a reduced contrast material (CM) dose provides significantly impaired quality and diagnostic confidence compared with standard-dose CTPA. METHODS: In this prospectively randomised study of 501 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and BW <100 kg, 246 were allocated into the low-dose group (80 kVp, 75 ml CM) and 255 into the normal-dose group (100 kVp, 100 ml CM). Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the pulmonary trunk was calculated. Two blinded chest radiologists independently evaluated subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence. Data were compared between the normal-dose and low-dose groups in five BW subgroups. RESULTS: Vessel attenuation did not differ between the normal-dose and low-dose groups within each BW subgroup (P = 1.0). The CNR was higher with the normal-dose compared with the low-dose protocol (P < 0.006) in all BW subgroups except for the 90-99 kg subgroup (P = 0.812). Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence did not differ between CT protocols in all subgroups (P between 0.960 and 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence with 80 kVp CTPA is not different from normal-dose protocol in any BW group up to 100 kg. KEY POINTS: • 80 kVp CTPA is safe in patients weighing <100 kg • Reduced radiation and iodine dose still provide high vessel attenuation • Image quality and diagnostic confidence with low-dose CTPA is good • Diagnostic confidence does not deteriorate in obesepatients weighing <100 kg.
Authors: Zsolt Szucs-Farkas; Fabian Schibler; Jennifer Cullmann; Jaled Charimo Torrente; Michael A Patak; Stephan Raible; Hanno Hoppe; Rolf Wyttenbach; Peter Vock; Sebastian T Schindera Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Zsolt Szucs-Farkas; Francis R Verdun; Gabriel von Allmen; Roberto L Mini; Peter Vock Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Sebastian T Schindera; Patricia Graca; Michael A Patak; Susanne Abderhalden; Gabriel von Allmen; Peter Vock; Zsolt Szucs-Farkas Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Long Jiang Zhang; Guang Ming Lu; Felix G Meinel; Andrew D McQuiston; James G Ravenel; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Vincent Cascio; Man Hon; Linda B Haramati; Animesh Gour; Peter Spiegler; Sanjeev Bhalla; Douglas S Katz Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Andreas Sauter; Thomas Koehler; Alexander A Fingerle; Bernhard Brendel; Vivien Richter; Michael Rasper; Ernst J Rummeny; Peter B Noël; Daniela Münzel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 3.240