Zhiming Tang1, Kun Fan1, Lanyu Qiu1, Likang Chen2, Qilin Qian1, Ting Zhang1, Yi Wang1, Menglong Han1, Chengjian Deng1, Weihong He1. 1. Department of Radiographic Imaging Center, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China No. 35 Jiefang Avenue, Zhengxiang District, Hengyang 421000, Hunan Province, P. R. China. 2. Department of General Practice, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China No. 35 Jiefang Avenue, Zhengxiang District, Hengyang 421000, Hunan Province, P. R. China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical value and feasibility of CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) with personalized injection of contrast agent in pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: In the present retrospective study, 130 patients who underwent CTPA examination in our hospital from June 2019 to May 2020 were evaluated. Among them, 67 cases were detected by CTPA with personalized injection of contrast agent as the observation group (Obs group), and 63 cases were detected by CTPA with bolus-tracking (BT) as the control group (Con group). The specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of the detection in the two groups were compared. The image quality score and superior vena cava artifact score of the two diagnostic methods were compared. Additionally, the volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The Obs group yielded a significantly higher specificity in diagnosing PE than the Con group (P<0.05), but there were no significant differences between the two groups in the sensitivity and accuracy (P>0.05). The image quality score and superior vena cava artifact score of the two groups were not significantly different (P>0.05), and the Obs group showed significantly lower CTDIvol and DLP than the Con group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: CTPA with personalized injection of contrast agent has good diagnostic value for PE, with good imaging effect and safe profile, and has a lower radiation dose requirement. AJTR
OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical value and feasibility of CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) with personalized injection of contrast agent in pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: In the present retrospective study, 130 patients who underwent CTPA examination in our hospital from June 2019 to May 2020 were evaluated. Among them, 67 cases were detected by CTPA with personalized injection of contrast agent as the observation group (Obs group), and 63 cases were detected by CTPA with bolus-tracking (BT) as the control group (Con group). The specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of the detection in the two groups were compared. The image quality score and superior vena cava artifact score of the two diagnostic methods were compared. Additionally, the volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The Obs group yielded a significantly higher specificity in diagnosing PE than the Con group (P<0.05), but there were no significant differences between the two groups in the sensitivity and accuracy (P>0.05). The image quality score and superior vena cava artifact score of the two groups were not significantly different (P>0.05), and the Obs group showed significantly lower CTDIvol and DLP than the Con group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: CTPA with personalized injection of contrast agent has good diagnostic value for PE, with good imaging effect and safe profile, and has a lower radiation dose requirement. AJTR
Authors: Charlotte Eveline Stein; Carolina J P W Keijsers; Janet E M Bootsma; Henrike J Schouten Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Salvatore Santo Signorelli; Gea Oliveri Conti; Giuseppe Carpinteri; Giovanni Lumera; Maria Fiore; Giuseppe Dattilo; Agostino Gaudio; Margherita Ferrante Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: James Ryan Loftus; Zhongxia Hu; Burke R Morin; Susan K Hobbs; Charles W Francis; Alok A Khorana; Deborah J Rubens; Katherine A Kaproth-Joslin Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2021-03-27 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Wanis H Ibrahim; Shaikha D Al-Shokri; Musa S Hussein; Antoun Kamel; Lana M Abu Afifeh; Gowri Karuppasamy; Jessiya V Parambil; Farras M Elasad; Mohamed S Abdelghani; Ahmed Abdellah; Mohammed E Faris Journal: Libyan J Med Date: 2022-12 Impact factor: 1.657
Authors: Timo Heidt; Simon Ehrismann; Jan-Bernd Hövener; Irene Neudorfer; Ingo Hilgendorf; Marco Reisert; Christoph E Hagemeyer; Andreas Zirlik; Jochen Reinöhl; Christoph Bode; Karlheinz Peter; Dominik von Elverfeldt; Constantin von Zur Muhlen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 4.379