Comparison of Abdominal Computed Tomographic Enhancement and Organ Lesion Depiction Between Weight-Based Scanner Software Contrast Dosing and a Fixed-Dose Protocol in a Tertiary Care Oncologic Center.
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2019 Jan/Feb;43(1):155-162. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000789.
Jensen CT1, Blair KJ1, Wagner-Bartak NA1, Vu LN1, Carter BW2, Sun J3, Bathala TK1, Gupta S1.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the quality of enhancement and solid-organ lesion depiction using weight-based intravenous (IV) contrast dosing calculated by injector software versus fixed IV contrast dose in oncologic abdominal computed tomographic (CT) examinations.
METHODS: This institutional review board-exempt retrospective cohort study included 134 patients who underwent single-phase abdominal CT before and after implementation of weight-based IV contrast injector software. Patient weight, height, body mass index, and body surface area were determined. Two radiologists qualitatively assessed examinations (4 indicating markedly superior to -4 indicating markedly inferior), and Hounsfield unit measurements were performed.
RESULTS: Enhancement (estimated mean, -0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.19 to 0.09; P = 0.46) and lesion depiction (estimated mean, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.07; P = 0.79) scores did not differ between CT examinations using weight-based IV contrast versus fixed IV contrast dosing when a minimum of 38.5 g of iodine was used. However, the scores using weight-based IV contrast dosing were lower when the injector software calculated and delivered less than 38.5 g of iodine (estimated mean, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.06 to -0.56; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in measured Hounsfield units between the CT examinations using weight-based IV contrast dosing versus fixed IV contrast dosing.
CONCLUSIONS: Oncologic CT image quality was maintained or improved with weight-based IV contrast dosing using injector software when using a minimum amount of 38.5 g of iodine.