AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, R.
Right arrow Articles by Bernardino, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, R.
Right arrow Articles by Bernardino, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 153, Issue 5, 973-976
Copyright © 1989 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Contrast-enhanced CT of the liver and spleen: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents

RC Nelson, JL Chezmar, JE Peterson, and ME Bernardino

Department of Radiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322.

We conducted a randomized, blinded, prospective study evaluating hepatic parenchymal density changes during dynamic bolus CT (180 ml of contrast material given IV) and delayed CT (5 hr after 60 g of iodine) in order to compare the enhancement characteristics of an ionic contrast agent (iothalamate-60) and two nonionic agents (iohexol-300 and iopamidol-300). A total of 75 patients with known or suspected cancer were studied (25 patients per contrast agent). After a baseline unenhanced CT scan was obtained, dynamic bolus and delayed CT scans were obtained for all patients with one of the three contrast agents. The density of the liver and spleen was measured in Hounsfield units (H) for unenhanced CT, dynamic bolus CT, and delayed CT. The average percentage of enhancement was calculated as follows: postcontrast density minus precontrast density was divided by precontrast density and then multiplied by 100. For dynamic bolus CT, the average percentage of enhancement of the liver was 105% when iohexol-300 was used, 98% when iopamidol-300 was used, and 83% when iothalamate-60 was used. No significant difference was seen between the postcontrast enhancement of the three contrast agents on dynamic bolus CT scans (p greater than .05). For delayed CT, the average percentage of enhancement of the liver was 34% when iothalamate-60 was used, 28% when iopamidol-300 was used, and 16% when iohexol-300 was used. Both iothalamate-60 and iopamidol-300 showed superior enhancement on delayed CT, compared with iohexol-300 (p = .0001). We conclude that for dynamic bolus CT, all three contrast agents are similar, with no statistically significant differences in postcontrast enhancement of the liver. For delayed CT, however, hepatic enhancement with iothalamate-60 and iopamidol-300 is statistically superior to that with iohexol-300.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
K Bae and K-N Jeon
CT findings of malarial spleen.
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2006; 79(946): e145 - e147.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.