Different intravenous contrast media concentrations do not affect clinical assessment of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans in an intraindividual comparison

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 47, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 497-502

  Prechtel, Hans W E ^a   Verburg, Frederik A ^a,b   Palmowski, Moritz ^a,c   Krohn, Thomas ^a   Pietsch, Hubertus ^d   Kuhl, Christiane K ^a   Mottaghy, Felix M ^a,b   Behrendt, Florian F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL RWTH AACHEN   (Germany)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Departments of Experimental Molecular Imaging   (Germany)

^d BAYER PHARMA AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

attenuation correction; contrast media; iodine concentration; PET CT

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; IOPROMIDE;

ADULT; AGED; ANUS CANCER; AORTA BIFURCATION; ARTICLE; ASCENDING AORTA; ASTROCYTOMA; AUTOCHTHON MUSCLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER OF UNKNOWN PRIMARY SITE; CELIAC PLEXUS; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COLON CARCINOMA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG UPTAKE; EMBRYONAL CANCER; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INFERIOR CAVA VEIN; KIDNEY; KIDNEY CANCER; LARYNX CANCER; LIVER; LUNG CANCER; LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MELANOMA; MESENTERIC ARTERY; MESENTERIC FAT; MESENTERY; MUSCLE; MYOEPITHELIAL CANCER; PANCREAS CANCER; PORTAL VEIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RECTUM CANCER; SARCOMA; SEMINOMA; SUBCLAVIAN VEIN;

EID: 84864867199     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31825d676e     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Abramyuk A, Wolf G, Shakirin G, et al. Preliminary assessment of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT implementation in pretreatment FDG-PET/CT for outcome prediction in head and neck tumors. Acta Radiol. 2010;51:793-799.
2. Buchs NC, Bühler L, Bucher P, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced 18Ffluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in detection and presurgical assessment of pancreatic cancer: a prospective study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;26:657-662.
3. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Egelhof T, et al. Focal tracer uptake: a potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. J Nucl Med. 2002; 43:1339-1342.
4. Ay MR, Zaidi H. Assessment of errors caused by X-ray scatter and use of contrast medium when using CT-based attenuation correction in PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:1301-1313.
5. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:181-200.
6. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:885-895.
7. Seo HJ, Kim MJ, Lee JD, et al. Gadoxetate disodiumYenhanced magnetic resonance imaging versus contrast-enhanced 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Invest Radiol. 2011;46:548-555.
8. Yau YY, Chan WS, Tam YM, et al. Application of intravenous contrast in PET/CT: does it really introduce significant attenuation correction error? J Nucl Med. 2005;46:283-291.
9. Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF, et al. Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186:308-319.
10. Berthelsen AK, Holm S, Loft A, et al. PET/CTwith intravenous contrast can be used for PET attenuation correction in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1167-1175.
11. Heusner TA, Kuehl H, Veit-Haibach P, et al. Highly iodinated intravenous contrast material for PET/CTVa feasibility study. Rofo. 2008;180:740-745.
12. Brechtel K, Klein M, Vogel M, et al. Optimized contrast-enhanced CT protocols for diagnostic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT: technical aspects of single-phase versus multiphase CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:470-476.
13. Cademartiri F, de Monye C, Pugliese F, et al. High iodine concentration contrast material for noninvasive multislice computed tomography coronary angiography: iopromide 370 versus iomeprol 400. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:349-353.
14. Setty BN, Sahani DV, Ouellette-Piazzo K, et al. Comparison of enhancement, image quality, cost, and adverse reactions using 2 different contrast medium concentrations for routine chest CTon 16-slice MDCT. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30:818-822.
15. Furuta A, Ito K, Fujita T, et al. Hepatic enhancement in multiphasic contrastenhanced MDCT: comparison of high-and low-iodine-concentration contrast medium in same patients with chronic liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:157-162.
16. Rist C, Nikolaou K, Kirchin MA, et al. Contrast bolus optimization for cardiac 16-slice computed tomography: comparison of contrast medium formulations containing 300 and 400 milligrams of iodine per milliliter. Invest Radiol. 2006; 41:460-467.
17. Nance JW Jr, Henzler T, Meyer M, et al. Optimization of contrast material delivery for dual-energy computed tomography pulmonary angiography in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Invest Radiol. 2012;47: 78-84.
18. Mahnken AH, Jost G, Seidensticker P, et al. Contrast timing in computed tomography: effect of different contrast media concentrations on bolus geometry. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:e629Ye632.
19. Behrendt FF, Jost G, Pietsch H, et al. Computed tomography angiography: the effect of different chaser flow rates, volumes, and fluids on contrast enhancement. Invest Radiol. 2011;46:271-276.
20. Becker CR, Vanzulli A, Fink C, et al. Multicenter comparison of high concentration contrast agent iomeprol-400 with iso-osmolar iodixanol-320: contrast enhancement and heart rate variation in coronary dual-source computed tomographic angiography. Invest Radiol. 2011;46:457-464.
21. Holalkere NS, Matthes K, Kalva SP, et al. 64-Slice multidetector row CT angiography of the abdomen: comparison of low versus high concentration iodinated contrast media in a porcine model. Br J Radiol. 2011;84:221-228.
22. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT, II: effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Radiology. 1998; 207:657-662.
23. Pfannenberg AC, Aschoff P, Brechtel K, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced multiphase CT in combined PET/CT protocols for oncological imaging. Br J Radiol. 2007;80:437-445.
24. Behrendt FF, Pietsch H, Jost G, et al. Intra-individual comparison of different contrast media concentrations (300 mg, 370 mg and 400 mg iodine) in MDCT. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1644-1650.
25. Behrendt FF, Plumhans C, Keil S, et al. Contrast enhancement in chest multidetector computed tomography: intraindividual comparison of 300 mg/mL versus 400 mg/mL iodinated contrast medium. Acad Radiol. 2009;16: 144-149.
26. Chambers TP, Baron RL, Lush RM, et al. Hepatic CTenhancement: a method to demonstrate reproducibility. Radiology. 1993;188:627-631.
27. Chambers TP, Baron RL, Lush RM, et al. Hepatic CTenhancement: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents in the same patients. Radiology. 1994; 190:721-725.