Literature DB >> 25027836

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

Erica Lauren Buttigieg1, Karen Borg Grima, Kelvin Cortis, Sandro Galea Soler, Francis Zarb.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of different oral contrast media (OCM) for abdominopelvic CT examinations performed for follow-up general oncological indications. The objectives were to establish anatomical image quality criteria for abdominopelvic CT; use these criteria to evaluate and compare image quality using positive OCM, neutral OCM and no OCM; and evaluate possible benefits for the medical imaging department.
METHODS: Forty-six adult patients attending a follow-up abdominopelvic CT for general oncological indications and who had a previous abdominopelvic CT with positive OCM (n = 46) were recruited and prospectively placed into either the water (n = 25) or no OCM (n = 21) group. Three radiologists performed absolute visual grading analysis (VGA) to assess image quality by grading the fulfilment of 24 anatomical image quality criteria.
RESULTS: Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis of the data showed comparable image quality with regards to reproduction of abdominal structures, bowel discrimination, presence of artefacts, and visualization of the amount of intra-abdominal fat for the three OCM protocols.
CONCLUSION: All three OCM protocols provided similar image quality for follow-up abdominopelvic CT for general oncological indications. KEY POINTS: • Positive oral contrast media are routinely used for abdominopelvic multidetector computed tomography • Experimental study comparing image quality using three different oral contrast materials • Three different oral contrast materials result in comparable CT image quality • Benefits for patients and medical imaging department.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25027836     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3285-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  22 in total

1.  Abdominal CT: clear fluids can replace water-soluble oral contrast media.

Authors:  Douglas H Jamieson
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2002-03-19

2.  Abdominal helical CT: milk as a low-attenuation oral contrast agent.

Authors:  S E Thompson; V Raptopoulos; R L Sheiman; M M McNicholas; P Prassopoulos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation.

Authors:  M Båth; L G Månsson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2006-07-19       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology.

Authors:  Sara Börjesson; Markus Håkansson; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Sune Svensson; Anders Tingberg; Anna Grahn; Mark Ruschin; Bengt Hemdal; Sören Mattsson; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

6.  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

7.  VIEWDEX: an efficient and easy-to-use software for observer performance studies.

Authors:  Markus Håkansson; Sune Svensson; Sara Zachrisson; Angelica Svalkvist; Magnus Båth; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 0.972

8.  Oral contrast media for body CT: Comparison of diatrizoate sodium and iohexol for patient acceptance and bowel opacification.

Authors:  Michelle M McNamara; Mark E Lockhart; Naomi S Fineberg; Lincoln L Berland
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Routine use of positive oral contrast material is not required for oncology patients undergoing follow-up multidetector CT.

Authors:  Sreemathi Harieaswar; Arumugam Rajesh; Yvette Griffin; Raman Tyagi; Bruno Morgan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Oral contrast agents for CT of abdominal trauma in pediatric patients: a comparison of dilute hypaque and water.

Authors:  Mark J Halsted; John M Racadio; Kathleen H Emery; Peter Kreymerman; Stacy A Poe; Judy A Bean; Lane F Donnelly
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  1 in total

1.  Image quality of cone beam computed tomography for evaluation of extremity fractures in the presence of metal hardware: visual grading characteristics analysis.

Authors:  Greg M Osgood; Gaurav K Thawait; Nima Hafezi-Nejad; Delaram Shakoor; Adam Shaner; John Yorkston; Wojciech B Zbijewski; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; Shadpour Demehri
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 3.039

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.