Contrast material administration protocols for 64-MDCT angiography: Altering volume and rate and use of a saline chaser to better match the imaging window - physiologic phantom study

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 193, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1568-1575

  Coursey, Courtney A ^a   Nelson, Rendon C ^a   Weber, Paul W ^b   Howle, Laurens E ^b   Nichols, Eli B ^b   Marin, Daniele ^a   DeLong, David ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Duke University   (United States)

Author keywords

Cardiac output; Contrast material; CT angiography; Saline chaser

Indexed keywords

IOPAMIDOL;

AORTA; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HEART OUTPUT; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; IOPAMIDOL; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SODIUM CHLORIDE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 73449135172     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2670     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Cohan RH, Bullard MA, Ellis JH, et al. Local reactions after injection of iodinated contrast material: detection, management, and outcome. Acad Radiol 1997; 4:711-718
2. Wang CL, Cohan RH, Ellis JH, Adusumilli S, Dunnick NR. Frequency, management, and outcome of extravasation of nonionic iodinated contrast medium in 69,657 intravenous injections. Radiology 2007; 243:80-87
3. Federle MP, Chang PJ, Confer S, Ozgun B. Frequency and effects of extravasation of ionic and nonionic CT contrast media during rapid bolus injection. Radiology 1998; 206:637-640
4. Gleeson TG, Bulugahapitiya S. Contrast-induced nephropathy. AJR 2004; 183:1673-1689
5. Tublin ME, Murphy ME, Tessler FN. Current concepts in contrast media-induced nephropathy. AJR 1998; 171:933-939
6. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part 1. Prediction with a computer model. Radiology 1998; 207:647-655
7. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Howle L, Nichols E, DeLong DM, Merkle EM. Effect of varying injection rates of a saline chaser on aortic enhancement in CT angiography: phantom study. Eur Radiol 2008; 18:1683-1689
8. Erturk SM, Ichikawa T, Sou H, Tsukamoto T, Motosugi U, Araki T. Effect of duration of contrast material injection on peak enhancement times and values of the aorta, main portal vein, and liver at dynamic MDCT with the dose of contrast medium tailored to patient weight. Clin Radiol 2008; 63:263-271
9. Awai K, Nakayama Y, Nakaura T, et al. Prediction of aortic peak enhancement in monophasic contrast injection protocols at multidetector CT: phantom and patient studies. Radiat Med 2007; 25:14-21
10. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic peak enhancement at CT: effect of contrast medium injection rate-pharmacokinetic analysis and experimental porcine model. Radiology 1998; 206:455-464
11. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part II. Effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Radiology 1998; 207:657-662
12. Husmann L, Alkadhi H, Boehm T, et al. Influence of cardiac hemodynamic parameters on coronary artery opacification with 64-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1111-1116
13. Utsunomiya D, Awai K, Tamura Y, et al. 16-MDCT aortography with a low-dose contrast material protocol. AJR 2006; 186:374-378
14. Awai K, Hiraishi K, Hori S. Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Radiology 2004; 230:142-150
15. Sheiman RG, Raptopoulos V, Caruso P, Vrachliotis T, Pearlman J. Comparison of tailored and empiric scan delays for CT angiography of the abdomen. AJR 1996; 167:725-729
16. Rosovsky MA, Rusinek H, Berenstein A, Basak S, Setton A, Nelson P. High-dose administration of nonionic contrast media: a retrospective review. Radiology 1996; 200:119-122
17. Moore RD, Steinberg EP, Powe NR, et al. Nephrotoxicity of high-osmolality versus low-osmolality contrast media: randomized clinical trial. Radiology 1992; 182:649-655
18. Drug Delivery Escrow Website. www.drugdelivery.ca. Accessed November 1, 2008
19. MXR SourceOne Website. http://merryxray.com. Accessed September 14, 2009
20. Diehm N, Pena C, Benenati JF, Tsoukas AI, Katzen BT. Adequacy of an early arterial phase low-volume contrast protocol in 64-detector computed tomography angiography for aortoiliac aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 2008; 47:492-498
21. Kalva SP, Sahani DP, Hahn PE, Saini S. Using the k-edge to improve contrast conspicuity and to lower radiation dose with a 16-MDCT: a phantom and human study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30:391-397
22. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Mukundan S, et al. Hypervascular liver tumors: low tube voltage high tube current multi-detector row CT for enhanced detection-phantom study. Radiology 2008; 246:125-132
23. Tatsugami F, Husmann L, Herzog BA, et al. Evaluation of a body mass index-adapted protocol for low dose 64-MDCT coronary angiography with prospective ECG triggering. AJR 2009; 192:635-638
24. Johnson PT, Fishman EK. IV contrast selection for MDCT: current thoughts and practice. AJR 2006; 186:406-415
25. Schoellnast H, Deutschmann HA, Berghold A, Fritz GA, Schaffler GJ, Tilich M. MDCT angiography of the pulmonary arteries: influence of body weight, body mass index, and scan length on arterial enhancement at different iodine flow rates. AJR 2006; 187:1074-1078
26. Hughes PM, Bisset R. Non-ionic contrast media: a comparison of iodine delivery rates during manual injection angiography. Br J Radiol 1991; 64:417-419
27. Brunette J, Mongrain R, Rodes-Cabau J, Larose E, Leask R, Bertrand OF. Comparative rheology of low- and iso-osmolarity contrast agents at different temperatures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008; 71:78-83