Literature DB >> 25316055

Abdominal and pelvic CT: is positive enteric contrast still necessary? Results of a retrospective observational study.

S Kammerer1, A J Höink, J Wessling, H Heinzow, R Koch, C Schuelke, W Heindel, B Buerke.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of abdominal CT depending on the type of enteric contrast agent. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Multislice CTs of 2,008 patients with different types of oral preparation (positive with barium, n = 576; neutral with water, n = 716; and no enteric contrast, n = 716) were retrospectively evaluated by two radiologists including delineation of intestinal segments and influence on diagnosis and diagnostic reliability exerted by the enteric contrast, using a three-point scale. Furthermore, diagnostic reliability of the delineation of selected enteric pathologies was noted. CT data were assigned into groups: oncology, inflammation, vascular, pathology, trauma and gastrointestinal pathology.
RESULTS: Delineation of the bowel was clearly practicable across all segments irrespective of the type of enteric contrast, though a slight impairment was observed without enteric contrast. Although delineation of intestinal pathologies was mostly classified "clearly delimitable" more difficulties occurred without oral contrast (neutral/positive/no contrast, 0.8 %/3.8 %/6.5 %). Compared to examinations without enteric contrast, there was a significant improvement in diagnosis that was even increased regarding the reader's diagnostic reliability. Positive opacification impaired detection of mucosal enhancement or intestinal bleeding.
CONCLUSION: Water can replace positive enteric contrast agents in abdominal CTs. However, selected clinical questions require individual enteric contrast preparations. Pathology detection is noticeably impaired without any enteric contrast.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25316055     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3446-9

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


  30 in total

1.  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

2.  Use of water as an oral contrast agent for CT study of the stomach.

Authors:  G Angelelli; L Macarini; A Fratello
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Comparison of colonic transit between polyethylene glycol and water as oral contrast vehicles in the CT evaluation of acute appendicitis.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Hebert; Andrew J Taylor; Thomas C Winter
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Semiautomatic lymph node segmentation in multislice computed tomography: impact of slice thickness on segmentation quality, measurement precision, and interobserver variability.

Authors:  Boris Buerke; Michael Puesken; Florian Beyer; Joachim Gerss; Matthias Weckesser; Harald Seifarth; Walter Heindel; Johannes Wessling
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.016

5.  Assessment of tube current modulation in pelvic CT.

Authors:  G R Iball; D S Brettle; A C Moore
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Oral contrast with computed tomography in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma in children.

Authors:  K R Shankar; D A Lloyd; L Kitteringham; H M Carty
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  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

Review 8.  Acquired gastrointestinal fistulas: classification, etiologies, and imaging evaluation.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; Sanjeev Bhalla; Dennis M Balfe
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Acute appendicitis: CT and US correlation in 100 patients.

Authors:  E J Balthazar; B A Birnbaum; J Yee; A J Megibow; J Roshkow; C Gray
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Multiplanar spiral CT enterography in patients with Crohn's disease using a negative oral contrast material: initial results of a noninvasive imaging approach.

Authors:  Pia Reittner; Toria Goritschnig; Wolfgang Petritsch; Otto Doerfler; Klaus W Preidler; Thomas Hinterleitner; Dieter H Szolar
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-04-30       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Oral contrast for CT in patients with acute non-traumatic abdominal and pelvic pain: what should be its current role?

Authors:  Ania Z Kielar; Michael N Patlas; Douglas S Katz
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2016-05-11

2.  Oral Contrast is no Longer Needed.

Authors:  Egbert Knöpfle
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 5.594

3.  Utility of CT oral contrast administration in the emergency department of a quaternary oncology hospital: diagnostic implications, turnaround times, and assessment of ED physician ordering.

Authors:  Corey T Jensen; Katherine J Blair; Ott Le; Jia Sun; Wei Wei; Brinda Rao Korivi; Ajaykumar C Morani; Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-11

4.  A new technique for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: abdominal CT with compression to the right lower quadrant.

Authors:  Abidin Kılınçer; Erhan Akpınar; Bülent Erbil; Emre Ünal; Ali Devrim Karaosmanoğlu; Volkan Kaynaroğlu; Deniz Akata; Mustafa Özmen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  [Incidental and "leave me alone" findings in the GI tract-part 1 : Intestinal lumen and intestinal wall].

Authors:  J Wessling; A Schreyer; L Grenacher; M Juchems; K Ringe
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 6.  Tackling the increasing contamination of the water supply by iodinated contrast media.

Authors:  Helena M Dekker; Gerard J Stroomberg; Mathias Prokop
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-02-24

7.  Impact of low-kVp scan technique on oral contrast density at abdominopelvic CT.

Authors:  Douglas H Sheafor; Mark D Kovacs; Philip Burchett; Melissa M Picard; Brenton Davis; Andrew D Hardie
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  The role of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) angiography in the diagnosis and therapy of non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia (NOMI): Could MSCT replace DSA in diagnosis?

Authors:  Sara Kammerer; Christoph Schuelke; Shoma Berkemeyer; Aglae Velasco; Walter Heindel; Michael Koehler; Boris Buerke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Evaluation of neutral oral contrast agents for assessment of the small bowel at abdominal staging CT.

Authors:  Till F Kaireit; Carolin Huisinga; Matti Peperhove; Frank Wacker; Kristina I Ringe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.