An evaluation of the use of oral contrast media in abdominopelvic CT

Optimizing Outpatient Oral Contrast Use in Abdominal CT-A Radiology Pandemic Response Initiative to Reduce Patient Time in the Waiting Room and Reduce Costs, While Improving Patient Experience

Purpose: The aim was to reduce outpatient wait time and improve patient experience by optimising oral contrast use. Methods: Our multidisciplinary stakeholder collaboration implemented two simultaneous interventions: (1) Creation of 'oral contrast policy', limiting recommended indications. (2) Creation of a new shorter oral contrast regime (30 vs 60 min). We conducted a retrospective service evaluation of oral contrast use in outpatient (OP) abdominal CT at baseline and post-intervention. Patient wait times were measured and per-patient cost-savings were reported. An image quality review was performed by 2 blinded abdominal radiologists. Patient experience was evaluated with a standard voluntary survey. Statistical analysis was performed comparing baseline and evaluation outcomes using Chi-square or Fisher Exact test for categorical variables and Student's t-test or ANOVA for continuous data. Results: Over 1-month periods, OP CT scans were assessed in baseline (pre-pandemic) n = 575, baseline (pandemic) n = 495 and post-intervention n = 545 groups. Oral contrast use reduced from 420/575, 73.0% at baseline to 178/545, 32.7% post intervention. The turn-around time reduced by 15.8 minutes per patient from 70.3 to 54.5 minutes, P < .001 (Interventions 1 and 2). The diagnostic quality did not differ between the oral contrast regimes (Intervention 2, P = 1.0, P = .08). No repeat CTs were needed due to lack of oral contrast (Intervention 1) or poor opacification (Intervention 2). There was oral contrast cost reductions of 69.1-78.4% (P < .001). Patients reported their overall experience was improved post-intervention (Interventions 1 and 2). Conclusions: Optimising the CT oral contrast service through judicious use and a shorter regime, reduced patient wait times, improved patient experience and preserved diagnostic quality.

Positive Versus Neutral Oral Contrast Material for Detection of Malignant Deposits in Intraabdominal Nonsolid Organs on CT

BACKGROUND. Data are limited regarding utility of positive oral contrast material for peritoneal tumor detection on CT. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to compare positive versus neutral oral contrast material for detection of malignant deposits in nonsolid intraabdominal organs on CT. METHODS. This retrospective study included 265 patients (133 men, 132 women; median age, 61 years) who underwent an abdominopelvic CT examination in which the report did not suggest presence of malignant deposits and a subsequent CT examination within 6 months in which the report indicated at least one unequivocal malignant deposit. Examinations used positive (iohexol; n = 100) or neutral (water; n = 165) oral agents. A radiologist reviewed images to assess whether the deposits were visible (despite clinical reports indicating no deposits) on unblinded comparison with the follow-up examinations; identified deposits were assigned to one of seven intraabdominal compartments. The radiologist also assessed adequacy of bowel filling with oral contrast material. Two additional radiologists independently reviewed examinations in blinded fashion for malignant deposits. NPV was assessed of clinical CT reports and blinded retrospective readings for detection of malignant deposits visible on unblinded comparison with follow-up examinations. RESULTS. Unblinded review identified malignant deposits in 58.1% (154/265) of examinations. In per-patient analysis of clinical reports, NPV for malignant deposits was higher for examinations with adequate bowel filling with positive oral contrast material (65.8% [25/38]) than for examinations with inadequate bowel filling with positive oral contrast material (45.2% [28/62], p = .07) or with neutral oral contrast material regardless of bowel filling adequacy (35.2% [58/165], p = .002). In per-compartment analysis of blinded interpretations, NPV was higher for examinations with adequate and inadequate bowel filling with positive oral contrast material than for examinations with neutral oral contrast regardless of bowel filling adequacy (reader 1: 94.7% [234/247] and 92.5% [382/413] vs 88.3% [947/1072], both p = .045; reader 2: 93.1% [228/245] and 91.6% [361/394] vs 85.9% [939/1093], both p = .01). CONCLUSION. CT has suboptimal NPV for malignant deposits in intraabdominal nonsolid organs. Compared with neutral material, positive oral contrast material improves detection, particularly with adequate bowel filling. CLINICAL IMPACT. Optimization of bowel preparation for oncologic CT may help avoid potentially severe clinical consequences of missed malignant deposits.

Bowel Peristalsis Artifact on Dual-Energy CT: In Vitro Study on the Influence of Different Dual-Energy CT Platforms and Enteric Contrast Agents

BACKGROUND. The value of dual-energy CT (DECT) for bowel wall assessment is increasingly recognized. Although technical improvements reduce peristalsis artifact in conventional CT, the effects of peristalsis on DECT image reconstructions remain poorly studied. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of different DECT scanners and enteric contrast agents on the severity of bowel peristalsis artifact in vitro. METHODS. To simulate bowel peristalsis, a 3-cm-diameter corrugated hollow tube representing the bowel was oscillated constantly in the z-axis within a larger water-filled cylinder. The bowel was serially filled with air, water, and iodinated or experimental dark contrast material and scanned on four different DECT platforms (spectral detector, rapid peak kilovoltage switching, split filter, and dual source) to reconstruct 120-kVp-like and iodine images. Two readers rated each image reconstruction for artifact severity from 0 (none) to 3 (severe) and recorded the degree to which iodine images depicted bowel wall hyperattenuation on 120-kVp-like images as artifactual. Artifact severity scores were compared by ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS. Interrater agreement on artifact scores was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.79-0.84]). For 120-kVp-like images, mean peristalsis artifact scores were lower (all p < .001) for split-filter (1.47) and dual-source (1.86) scanners than for spectral-detector (2.58) and rapid-kilovoltage-switching (2.74) scanners. Compared with those on 120-kVp images, peristalsis artifacts on iodine images were less severe for spectral-detector (score, 1.03; p < .001) and rapid-kilovoltage-switching (2.09; p < .001) systems but more severe for dual-source (2.77; p < .001) and split-filter (2.62; p < .001) systems. Peristalsis artifact was rated less severe with experimental dark bowel contrast medium (score, 1.79) than with other bowel contrast agents (all p < .001). Iodine images helped identify bowel wall hyperattenuation as artifactual in 94.7% of reviewed cases for spectral-detector and 40.7% of cases for rapid-kilovoltage-switching scanners. CONCLUSION. For spectral-detector and rapid-kilovoltage-switching DECT, iodine images minimize peristalsis artifact, but for dual-source and split-filter DECT, mixed 120-kVp-like images are preferred. Compared with iodinated contrast material and water, experimental dark bowel contrast material reduces peristalsis artifact. CLINICAL IMPACT. Knowledge of the preferred images for reducing peristalsis artifact can lessen the effect of peristalsis on clinical DECT interpretation. Dark enteric contrast agents, when they become clinically available, may further reduce the effects of peristalsis.

A prospective study comparing water only with positive oral contrast in patients undergoing abdominal CT scan

Consecutive adults scheduled to undergo abdominal CT with oral contrast were asked to choose between 1000 ml water only or positive oral contrast (50 ml Télébrix-Gastro diluted in 950 ml water). Two abdominal radiologists independently reviewed each scan for image quality of the abdomen, the diagnostic confidence per system (gastrointestinalsystem/organs/peritoneum/retroperitoneum/lymph nodes) and overall diagnostic confidence to address the clinical question (not able/partial able/fully able). Radiation exposure was extracted from dose reports. Differences between both groups were evaluated by Student’s t-test, Mann-Whitney-U-test or chi-square-test. Of the 320participants, 233chose water only. All baseline characteristics, image quality of the abdomen and the diagnostic confidence of the organs were comparable between groups and both observers. Diagnostic confidence in the water only group was more commonly scored as less than good by observer1. The results were as follows: the gastrointestinal system(18/233vs1/87; p = 0.031), peritoneum (21/233vs1/87; p = 0.012), retroperitoneum (11/233vs0/87; p = 0.040) and lymph nodes (11/233vs0/87; p = 0.040). These structures were scored as comparable between both groups by observer2. The diagnostic confidence to address the clinical question could be partially addressed in 6/233 vs 0/87 patients (p = 0.259). The water only group showed a tendency towards less radiation exposure. In summary, most scan ratings were comparable between positive contrast and water only, but slightly favored positive oral contrast for one reader for some abdominal structures. Therefore, water only can replace positive oral contrast in the majority of the outpatients scheduled to undergo an abdominal CT.

Impact of low-energy CT imaging on selection of positive oral contrast media concentration

OBJECTIVES

To determine to what extent low-energy CT imaging affects attenuation of gastrointestinal tract (GIT) opacified with positive oral contrast media (OCM). Second, to establish optimal OCM concentrations for low-energy diagnostic CT exams.

METHODS

One hundred patients (38 men and 62 women; age 62 ± 11 years; BMI 26 ± 5) with positive OCM-enhanced 120-kVp single-energy CT (SECT), and follow-up 100-kVp acquisitions (group A; n = 50), or 40-70-keV reconstructions from rapid kV switching-single-source dual-energy CT (ssDECT) (group B; n = 50) were included. Luminal attenuation from different GIT segments was compared between exams. Standard dose of three OCM and diluted solutions (75%, 50%, and 25% concentrations) were introduced serially in a gastrointestinal phantom and scanned using SECT (120, 100, and 80 kVp) and DECT (80/140 kVp) acquisitions on a ssDECT scanner. Luminal attenuation was obtained on SECT and DECT images (40-70 keV), and compared to 120-kVp scans with standard OCM concentrations.

RESULTS

Luminal attenuation was higher on 100-kVp (328 HU) and on 40-60-keV images (410-924 HU) in comparison to 120-kVp scans (298 HU) in groups A and B (p < 0.05). Phantom: There was an inverse correlation between luminal attenuation and X-ray energy, increasing up to 527 HU on low-kVp and 999 HU on low-keV images (p < 0.05). 25% and 50% diluted OCM solutions provided similar or higher attenuation than 120 kVp, at low kVp and keV, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-energy CT imaging increases the attenuation of GIT opacified with positive OCM, permitting reduction of 25%-75% OCM concentration.

Image quality of cone beam computed tomography for evaluation of extremity fractures in the presence of metal hardware: visual grading characteristics analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate image quality and interobserver reliability of a novel cone-beam CT (CBCT) scanner in comparison with plain radiography for assessment of fracture healing in the presence of metal hardware.

METHODS

In this prospective institutional review board-approved Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996-complaint study, written informed consent was obtained from 27 patients (10 females and 17 males; mean age 44 years, age range 21-83 years) with either upper or lower extremity fractures, and with metal hardware, who underwent CBCT scans and had a clinical radiograph of the affected part. Images were assessed by two independent observers for quality and interobserver reliability for seven visualization tasks. Visual grading characteristic (VGC) curve analysis determined the differences in image quality between CBCT and plain radiography. Interobserver agreement was calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

VGC results displayed preference of CBCT images to plain radiographs in terms of visualizing (1) cortical and (2) trabecular bones; (3) fracture line; (4) callus formation; (5) bridging ossification; and (6) screw thread-bone interface and its inferiority to plain radiograph in the visualization of (7) large metallic side plate contour with strong interobserver correlation (p-value < 0.05), except for visualizing large metallic side plate contour.

CONCLUSION

For evaluation of fracture healing in the presence of metal hardware, CBCT image quality is preferable to plain radiograph for all visualization tasks, except for large metallic side plate contours. Advances in knowledge: CBCT has the potential to be a good diagnostic alternative to plain radiographs in evaluation of fracture healing in the presence of metal hardware.

VIEWDEX: A STATUS REPORT

ViewDEX (Viewer for Digital Evaluation of X-ray images) is an image viewer and task manager suitable for research and optimisation tasks in medical imaging. The software has undergone continuous development during more than a decade and has during this time period been used in numerous studies. ViewDEX is DICOM compatible, and the features of the interface (tasks, image handling and functionality) are general and flexible. The set-up of a study is determined by altering properties in a text-editable file, enabling easy and flexible configuration. ViewDEX is developed in Java and can run from any disc area connected to a computer. It is free to use for non-commercial purposes and can be downloaded from http://www.vgregion.se/sas/viewdex The purposes of the present article are to give a short overview of the development of ViewDEX and to describe recent updates of the software. In addition, a description on how to configure a viewing session in ViewDEX is provided.