Literature DB >> 25576229

Iohexol versus diatrizoate for fecal/fluid tagging during CT colonography performed with cathartic preparation: comparison of examination quality.

Bohyun Kim1, Seong Ho Park, Gil-Sun Hong, Ju Hee Lee, Jong Seok Lee, Hyun Jin Kim, Ah Young Kim, Hyun Kwon Ha.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare iohexol vs. diatrizoate as fecal/fluid tagging agents for computed tomography colonography (CTC) regarding examination quality.
METHODS: Forty prospective patients (M:F = 23:17; 63 ± 11.6 years) received CTC using 50 mL (350 mgI/mL) oral iohexol for tagging. Forty other indication-matched, age-matched, and sex-matched patients who underwent CTC using 100 mL diatrizoate for tagging and otherwise the same technique, were retrospectively identified. Two groups were compared regarding overall examination quality, per-patient and per-segment scores of colonic bubbles (0 [no bubbles] to 5 [the largest amount]), and the volume, attenuation, and homogeneity (untagged, layered, and homogeneous) of the residual colonic fluid.
RESULTS: The iohexol group demonstrated a greater amount of colonic bubbles than the diatrizoate group: mean per-patient scores ± SD of 1.2 ± 0.8 vs. 0.7 ± 0.6, respectively (p = 0.003); and rates of segments showing ≥ grade 3 bubbles of 12.9 % (85/659) vs. 1.6 % (11/695), respectively (p = 0.001). Residual colonic fluid amount standardized to the colonic volume did not significantly differ: 7.2 % ± 4.2 vs. 7.8 % ± 3.7, respectively (p = 0.544). Tagged fluid attenuation was mostly comparable between groups and the fluid was homogeneously tagged in 98.7 % (224/227) vs. 99.5 % (218/219) segments, respectively (p = 0.344). Iohexol caused more colonic bubbles when used during cathartic CTC. Otherwise, examination quality was similarly adequate with both iohexol and diatrizoate. KEY POINTS: • When used for tagging, iohexol caused significantly more colonic bubbles than diatrizoate. • The residual colonic fluid amount did not significantly differ between iohexol and diatrizoate. • The quality of fluid tagging was similarly adequate in both iohexol and diatrizoate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25576229     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3568-0

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


  34 in total

Review 1.  CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal.

Authors:  Michael E Zalis; Matthew A Barish; J Richard Choi; Abraham H Dachman; Helen M Fenlon; Joseph T Ferrucci; Seth N Glick; Andrea Laghi; Michael Macari; Elizabeth G McFarland; Martina M Morrin; Perry J Pickhardt; Jorge Soto; Judy Yee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Panoramic endoluminal display with minimal image distortion using circumferential radial ray-casting for primary three-dimensional interpretation of CT colonography.

Authors:  Seung Soo Lee; Seong Ho Park; Jin Kook Kim; Namkug Kim; Jeongjin Lee; Beom Jin Park; Young Jun Kim; Min Woo Lee; Ah Young Kim; Hyun Kwon Ha
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  A randomized controlled trial evaluating a new 2-L PEG solution plus ascorbic acid vs 4-L PEG for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy.

Authors:  Flavio Valiante; Stefano Pontone; Cesare Hassan; Angelo Bellumat; Manuela De Bona; Angelo Zullo; Vincenzo de Francesco; Michele De Boni
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 4.088

4.  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

5.  Simethicone to prevent colonic bubbles during CT colonography performed with polyethylene glycol lavage and iohexol tagging: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Gil-Sun Hong; Seong Ho Park; Bohyun Kim; Ju Hee Lee; Jin Cheon Kim; Chang Sik Yu; Seunghee Baek; Jong Seok Lee; Hyun Jin Kim
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Automated volumetric analysis for comparison of oral sulfate solution (SUPREP) with established cathartic agents at CT colonography.

Authors:  Peter Bannas; Joshua Bakke; James L Patrick; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-01

7.  A low-volume polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate solution for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy: the NORMO randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Thierry Ponchon; Christian Boustière; Denis Heresbach; Hervé Hagege; Anne-Laure Tarrerias; Marc Halphen
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 4.088

8.  2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid versus 4 L PEG plus simethicon for colonoscopy preparation: a randomized single-blind clinical trial.

Authors:  Maurizio Gentile; Michele De Rosa; Giovanni Cestaro; Pietro Forestieri
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.719

9.  Improving quality of colonoscopy by adding simethicone to sodium phosphate bowel preparation.

Authors:  Sasinee Tongprasert; Abhasnee Sobhonslidsuk; Sasivimol Rattanasiri
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-06-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  The second ESGAR consensus statement on CT colonography.

Authors:  Emanuele Neri; Steve Halligan; Mikael Hellström; Philippe Lefere; Thomas Mang; Daniele Regge; Jaap Stoker; Stuart Taylor; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-09-15       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  1 in total

1.  Objective and Subjective Intrapatient Comparison of Iohexol Versus Diatrizoate for Bowel Preparation Quality at CT Colonography.

Authors:  Brandon Johnson; J Louis Hinshaw; Jessica B Robbins; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 3.959

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.