The optimal contrast media policy in CT of the liver. Part I: Technical notes

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 467-472

  Rengo, Marco ^a   Bellini, Davide ^a   De Cecco, Carlo N ^b   Osimani, Marcello ^a   Vecchietti, Fabrizio ^a   Caruso, Damiano ^a   Maceroni, Marco M ^a   Lucchesi, Paola ^a   Iafrate, Franco ^c   Paolantonio, Pasquale ^d   Ferrari, Riccardo ^d   Laghi, Andrea ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^c POLICLINICO UMBERTO I   (Italy)

^d SAN GIOVANNI ADDOLORATA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

Contrast medium; Injection protocols; MDCT; Parenchymal enhancement; Vascular enhancement

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL IMAGING; BREATH-HOLD; CONTRAST MEDIUM; LATEST DEVELOPMENT; MDCT; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION EXPOSURE; SPATIAL RESOLUTION; TECHNICAL NOTES; TECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENTS; TEMPORAL RESOLUTION; VOLUMETRIC TECHNIQUES;

CONTRAST MEDIA; TOMOGRAPHY;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; LIVER DISEASE; METHODOLOGY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOGRAPHY; REVIEW; TIME;

CONTRAST MEDIA; HUMANS; LIVER DISEASES; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; TIME FACTORS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 80051565250     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/ar.2011.100499     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Prokop M. Multislice CT: Technical principles and future trends. Eur Radiol 2003;13:3-13
2. Prokop M. Image processing and display techniques. In: Prokop M, Galanski M, eds. Spiral and Multislice Computed Tomography of the Body. Stuttgart: Thieme, 2003:45-82
3. Brink JA. Contrast optimization and scan timing for single and multidetector-row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2003;27 (Suppl. 1):3-8
4. Laghi A. Multidetector CT (64 slices) of the liver: Examination techniques. Eur Radiol 2007;17:675-83
5. Haider MA, Amitai MM, Rappaport DC, et al. Multi-detector row helical CT in preoperative assessment of small (, or=1.5 cm) liver metastases: Is thinner collimation better? Radiology 2002;225:1137-42
6. Yamashita Y, Komohara Y, Takahashi M, et al. Abdominal helical CT: Evaluation of optimal doses of intravenous contrast material - a prospective randomised study. Radiology 2000;216:718-23
7. Awai K, Takada K, Onishi H, et al. Aortic and hepatic enhancement and tumor-to-liver contrast: Analysis of the effect of different concentrations of contrast material at multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 2002;224:757-63
8. Foley WD, Hoffmann RG, Quiroz FA, et al. Hepatic helical CT: Contrast material injection protocol. Radiology 1994;192:367-71
9. Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, et al. Dynamic incremental CT: Effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 1995;195:353-7
10. 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;207:657-62
11. Matoba M, Kitadate M, Kondou T, et al. Depiction of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma with 64-MDCT: Comparison of moderate- and high-concentration contrast material with and without saline flush. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:738-44
12. Yanaga Y, Awai K, Namimoto T, et al. Optimal contrast dose for depiction of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma at dynamic CT using 64-MDCT. Am J Roentgenol 2008;90:1003-9
13. Fleischmann D. How to design injection protocols for multiple detector-row CT angiography (MDCTA). Eur Radiol 2005;15:60-5
14. Sakai S, Yabuuchi H, Chishaki A, et al. Effect of cardiac function on aortic peak time and peak enhancement during coronary CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 2009;75:173-7
15. Manghat NE, Morgan-Hughes GJ, Shaw SR, et al. Impaired left ventricular function has a detrimental effect on image quality in multi-detector row CT coronary angiography. Clin Radiol 2008;63:415-23
16. Bae KT. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: Considerations and approaches. Radiology 2010;256:32-61
17. Prince MR, Chabra SG, Winchester PA, et al. Contrast material travel times in patients undergoing peripheral MR angiography. Radiology 2002;224:55-61
18. Bader TR, Prokesch RW, Grabenwöger F. Timing of the hepatic arterial phase during contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the liver: Assessment of normal values in 25 volunteers. Invest Radiol 2000;35:486-92
19. Kim MJ, Choi JY, Lim JS, et al. Optimal scan window for detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas during MDCT examination. Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:198-206
20. Itoh S, Ikeda M, Satake H, et al. The effect of patient age on contrast enhancement during CT of the pancreatobiliary region. Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:505-10
21. Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S, et al. Body size indexes for optimizing iodine dose for aortic and hepatic enhancement at multidetector CT: Comparison of total body weight, lean body weight, and blood volume. Radiology 2010;254:163-9
22. Ho LM, Nelson RC, Delong DM. Determining contrast medium dose and rate on basis of lean body weight: Does this strategy improve patient-to-patient uniformity of hepatic enhancement during multi-detector row CT? Radiology 2007;243:431-7
23. Gorber SC, Tremblay M, Moher D, et al. A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: A systematic review. Obes Rev 2007;8:307-26
24. Pugh ND. Haemodynamic and rheological effects of contrast media: The role of viscosity and osmolality. Eur Radiol 1996;6:13-5
25. Pugh ND, Hutcheson IR, Edwards DH, et al. Angiographic contrast media relax isolated rabbit aorta through an endothelium-independent mechanism that may not depend on the presence of the iodine atom. Br J Radiol 1995;68:23-6
26. Kishimoto M, Doi S, Shimizu J, et al. Influence of osmolarity of contrast medium and saline flush on computed tomography angiography: Comparison of monomeric and dimeric iodinated contrast media with different iodine concentrations at an identical iodine delivery rate. Eur J Radiol 2010;76:135-9
27. Smedby O. Viscosity of some contemporary contrast media before and after mixing with whole blood. Acta Radiol 1992;33:600-5
28. Dorio PJ, Lee FT Jr, Henseler KP, et al. Using a saline chaser to decrease contrast media in abdominal CT. Am J Roentgenol 2003;180: 929-34
29. Schoellnast H, Tillich M, Deutschmann HA, et al. Improvement of parenchymal and vascular enhancement using saline flush and power injection for multiple-detector-row abdominal CT. Eur Radiol 2004;14:659-64
30. Schoellnast H, Tillich M, Deutschmann HA, et al. Abdominal multidetector row computed tomography: Reduction of cost and contrast material dose using saline flush. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2003;27:847-53
31. de Monyé C, Cademartiri F, de Weert TT, et al. Sixteen-detector row CT angiography of carotid arteries: Comparison of different volumes of contrast material with and without a bolus chaser. Radiology 2005;237:555-62
32. Irie T, Kajitani M, Yamaguchi M, et al. Contrast-enhanced CT with saline flush technique using two automated injectors: How much contrast medium does it savê J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002;26:287-91
33. Hopper KD, Mosher TJ, Kasales CJ, et al. Thoracic spiral CT: Delivery of contrast material pushed with injectable saline solution in a power injector. Radiology 1997;205:269-71
34. Tatsugami F, Matsuki M, Kani H, et al. Effect of saline pushing after contrast material injection in abdominal multidetector computed tomography with the use of different iodine concentrations. Acta Radiol 2006;47:192-7
35. Tatsugami F, Matsuki M, Inada Y, et al. Usefulness of saline pushing in reduction of contrast material dose in abdominal CT: Evaluation of time-density curve for the aorta, portal vein and liver. Br J Radiol 2007;80:231-4
36. Takao Nojo T, Ohtomo K. Use of a saline chaser in abdominal computed tomography: A systematic review. Clin Imaging 2009;33:261-6
37. Hittmair K, Fleischmann D. Accuracy of predicting and controlling time-dependent aortic enhancement from a test bolus injection. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2001;25:287-94
38. van Hoe L, Marchal G, Baert AL, et al. Determination of scan delay time in spiral CT-angiography: Utility of a test bolus injection. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995;19:216-20
39. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part I. Prediction with a computer model. Radiology 1998;207:647-55
40. Silverman PM, Roberts S, Brown B, et al. Helical CT of the liver: Clinical application of an automated computer technique, SmartPrep, for obtaining images with optimal contrast enhancement. Am J Roentgenol 1995;165:73-8
41. Fleischmann D, Hittmair K. Mathematical analysis of arterial enhancement and optimization of bolus geometry for CT angiography using the discrete fourier transform. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999;23:474-84
42. Fleischmann D. Contrast Medium Injection Technique. In: Schoepf UJ. Multidetector-Row CT of the Thorax. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2006:47-59
43. Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, et al. Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT. Radiographics 2006;26:1785-94
44. Namasivayam S, Kalra MK, Pottala KM, et al. Optimization of Z-axis automatic exposure control for multidetector row CT evaluation of neck and comparison with fixed tube current technique for image quality and radiation dose. Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:2221-5
45. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Kamath RS, et al. Sixteen-detector row CT of abdomen and pelvis: Study for optimization of Z-axis modulation technique performed in 153 patients. Radiology 2004;233:241-9
46. Rampado O, Marchisio F, Garelli E, et al. Effective dose and image quality evaluations of an automatic CT tube current modulation system with an anthropomorphic phantom. Eur J Radiol 2009;72:181-7
47. Rizzo S, Kalra M, Schmidt B, et al. Comparison of angular and combined automatic tube current modulation techniques with constant tube current CT of the abdomen and pelvis. Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:673-9
48. Sigal-Cinqualbre , Hennequin R, Abada HT, et al. Low-kilovoltage multi-detector row chest CT in adults: Feasibility and effect on image quality and iodine dose. Radiology 2004;231:169-74
49. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, et al. Lower tube voltage reduces contrast material and radiation doses on 16-MDCT aortography. Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:490-7
50. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, et al. Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: Preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 2005;237:945-51
51. Rehani MM, Bongartz G, KalenderW. Managing x-ray dose in computed tomography: ICRP Special Task Force report. Ann ICRP 2000;30:7-45
52. Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G. Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology 2000;217:430-5