AJR Join ARRS
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 Schweiger, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, B. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schweiger, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, B. P.
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 171, 1551-1558, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Optimizing contrast enhancement during helical CT of the liver: a comparison of two bolus tracking techniques

GD Schweiger, PJ Chang and BP Brown
Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City 52242, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a recently developed hardware and software system for CT scanning that generates images in real time and switches to helical CT scanning by either a visual cue or a region of interest (ROI) amplitude threshold. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We randomly and prospectively divided 120 abdominal CT examinations into three groups. Two groups received 75 ml of contrast agent at 1.5 ml/sec. Helical CT scanning began after visualization of the contrast bolus arrival in the hepatic veins (visual cue triggering) (39 patients) or after reaching an ROI threshold (automated ROI threshold triggering) (39 patients). A third group served as a control group (42 patients) and received 150 ml of contrast agent at 1 ml/sec. Quality of hepatic enhancement was assessed objectively and subjectively. Comparisons were made after stratifying each group into three weight classes. RESULTS: Errors occurred in 12 (31%) of 39 examinations in the group with automated ROI threshold triggering. In that group, we found a significantly (p < .04) lower mean hepatic enhancement in two of three weight categories, and a significantly (p < .04) lower mean subjective scan quality in one of three weight categories, than we found in the group with visual cue triggering. CONCLUSION: Optimizing portal venous phase helical CT of the liver after a low-volume bolus of contrast agent and an injection rate of 1.5 ml/sec is best achieved by initiating helical CT scanning after visualizing the contrast bolus arrival within the liver rather than after reaching a preset attenuation threshold.
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
 RadiologyHome page
K. Awai, K. Hiraishi, and S. Hori
Effect of Contrast Material Injection Duration and Rate on Aortic Peak Time and Peak Enhancement at Dynamic CT Involving Injection Protocol with Dose Tailored to Patient Weight
Radiology, January 1, 2004; 230(1): 142 - 150.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
K. Awai, K. Takada, H. Onishi, and S. Hori
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, September 1, 2002; 224(3): 757 - 763.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.