Split-bolus vs. multiphasic contrast bolus protocol in patients with pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma

Split-bolus single-phase versus single-bolus split-phase CT acquisition protocols for staging in patients with testicular cancer: A retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Computed tomography (CT) imaging has become indispensable in the management of medical oncology patients. Risks associated with high cumulative effective dose (CED) are relevant in testicular cancer patients. Split-bolus protocols, whereby the contrast medium injection is divided into two, followed by combining the required phase images in a single scan acquisition has been shown to provide images of comparable image quality and less radiation dose compared to single-bolus split-phase CT for various indications. We retrospectively evaluated the performance of split-bolus and single-bolus protocols in patients having follow-up CT imaging for testicular cancer surveillance.

METHODS

45 patients with testicular cancer undergoing surveillance CT imaging of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis who underwent split-bolus and single-bolus protocols were included. Quantitative image quality analysis was conducted by placing region of interests in pre-defined anatomical sub-structures within the abdominal cavity. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and radiation dose in the form of dose length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED) were recorded.

RESULTS

The DLP and ED for the single-bolus, split-phase acquisition was 506 ± 89 mGy cm and 7.59 ± 1.3 mSv, respectively. For the split-bolus, single-phase acquisition, 397 ± 94 mGy∗cm and 5.95 ± 1.4 mSv, respectively (p < 0.000). This represented a 21.5 % reduction in radiation dose exposure. The SNR for liver, muscle and fat for the single-bolus were 7.4, 4.7 and 8, respectively, compared to 5.5, 3.8 and 7.4 in the split-bolus protocol (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In a testicular cancer patient cohort undergoing surveillance CT imaging, utilization of a split-bolus single-phase acquisition CT protocol enabled a significant reduction in radiation dose whilst maintaining subjective diagnostic acceptability.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Use of split-bolus, single-phase acquisition has the potential to reduce CED in surveillance of testicular cancer patients.

Low keV portal venous phase as a surrogate for pancreatic phase in a pancreatic protocol dual-energy CT: feasibility, image quality, and lesion conspicuity

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of a proposed pancreatic protocol CT generated from portal-venous phase (PVP) dual-energy CT (DECT) acquisition and its impact on image quality, lesion conspicuity, and arterial visualization/involvement.

METHODS

We included 111 patients (mean age, 66.8 years) who underwent pancreatic protocol DECT (pancreatic phase, PP, and PVP). The original DECT acquisition was used to create two data sets-standard protocol (50 keV PP/65 keV PVP) and proposed protocol (40 keV/65 keV PVP). Three reviewers evaluated the two data sets for image quality, lesion conspicuity, and arterial visualization/involvement using a 5-point scale. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of pancreas and lesion-to-pancreas contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated. Qualitative scores, quantitative parameters, and dose-length product (DLP) were compared between standard and proposed protocols.

RESULTS

The image quality, SNR of pancreas, and lesion-to-pancreas CNR of the standard and proposed protocol were comparable (p = 0.11-1.00). Lesion conspicuity was comparable between the standard and proposed protocols for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (p = 0.55) and pancreatic cysts (p = 0.28). The visualization of larger arteries and arterial involvement were comparable between the two protocols (p = 0.056-1.00) while the scores were higher for smaller vessels in the standard protocol (p < 0.0001-0.0015). DLP of the proposed protocol (670.4 mGy·cm) showed a projected 42% reduction than the standard protocol (1145.9 mGy·cm) (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic protocol CT generated from a single PVP DECT acquisition is feasible and could potentially be an alternative to the standard pancreatic protocol with PP and PVP.

KEY POINTS

• The lesion conspicuity for focal pancreatic lesions was comparable between the proposed protocol and standard dual-phase pancreatic protocol CT. • Qualitative and quantitative image assessments were almost comparable between two protocols. • The radiation dose of a proposed protocol showed a projected 42% reduction from the conventional protocol.

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreas: recommendations for Standardized Imaging and Reporting from the Society of Abdominal Radiology IPMN disease focused panel

There have been many publications detailing imaging features of malignant transformation of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN), management and recommendations for imaging follow-up of diagnosed or presumed IPMN. However, there is no consensus on several practical aspects of imaging IPMN that could serve as a clinical guide for radiologists and enable future data mining for research. These aspects include how to measure IPMN, define reporting terminology, standardize reporting and unify guidelines for surveillance. The Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) created multiple Disease-Focused Panels (DFP) comprised multidisciplinary panel members who focus on a particular disease, with the goal to develop ways for radiologists to improve patient care, education, and research. DFP members met to identify the current controversies and limitations of imaging pancreatic IPMN. This paper aims to provide a practical review of the key imaging characteristics of IPMN for trainees and practicing radiologists, to guide uniformity of performance and interpretation of surveillance imaging studies, and to improve communication with clinicians by providing a lexicon and reporting template based on the experience of the SAR-DFP panel members.