HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Google Scholar Articles by Keyzer, C. Articles by Gevenois, P. A. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Keyzer, C. Articles by Gevenois, P. A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

MDCT for Suspected Acute Appendicitis in Adults: Impact of Oral and IV Contrast Media at Standard-Dose and Simulated Low-Dose Techniques

¹ Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Charleroi, Charleroi, Belgium.
² Present address: Department of Radiology, Hôpital Erasme, Rte. de Lennik, 808, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium.
³ Department of Biostatistics and Medical Computing, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
⁴ Department of Radiology, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
⁵ Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Biologie Humaine et Moléculaire, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to prospectively investigate the influence of oral, IV, and oral and IV contrast media on the information provided by MDCT at standard and simulated low radiation doses in adults suspected of having acute appendicitis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. One hundred thirty-one consecutive patients (80 women, 51 men; age range, 18–87 years; mean age, 37 years) suspected of having appendicitis were randomly assigned to either ingest or not ingest iodinated contrast material. Thereafter, all patients underwent IV unenhanced and enhanced abdominopelvic MDCT with a 4 x 2.5 mm collimation at 120 kVp and 100 mAs_eff. Dose reduction corresponding to 30 mAs_eff was simulated. Two radiologists independently read scans during separate sessions, assessed appendix visualization, and proposed a diagnosis (i.e., appendicitis or an alternative diagnosis). The final diagnosis was based on either surgical findings or clinical follow-up. Data were analyzed by factorial analysis of multiple correspondences followed by an ascending hierarchic classification method.

RESULTS. Factorial analysis and ascending hierarchic classification revealed that, in terms of diagnostic correctness, reader influence predominated over the influence of IV and oral contrast media use and radiation dose but that correctness was also influenced by the patient's sex (p = 0.048) and was lower in cases of alternative diseases (p < 0.001). Visualization of the appendix depended predominantly on the reader rather than on the use of IV, oral, or oral and IV contrast agents or on radiation dose.

CONCLUSION. Diagnostic correctness is much more influenced by the reader than by the use of contrast medium (oral, IV, or both) or of simulated low-radiation-dose technique.

Keywords: acute appendicitis • appendicitis • contrast media • MDCT

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. K. Paulson and C. A. Coursey CT Protocols for Acute Appendicitis: Time for Change Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2009; 193(5): 1268 - 1271. [Full Text] [PDF]