Top

Published in:

01-02-2011 | Gastrointestinal

Does the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affect the radiation exposure in low-dose CT colonography performed with an automatic exposure control?

Authors: Hyun Kyong Lim, Kyoung Ho Lee, So Yeon Kim, Kil Joong Kim, Bohyoung Kim, Hyunna Lee, Seong Ho Park, Jeffrey H. Yanof, Seung-sik Hwang, Young Hoon Kim

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 2/2011

Abstract

Objective

To determine whether the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affects the radiation exposure in low-dose screening CT colonography performed with an automatic tube-current modulation technique.

Methods

The study included 311 patients. The tagging agent was barium (n = 271) or iodine (n = 40). Correlation was measured between mean volume CT dose index (CTDI _vol) and the estimated x-ray attenuation of the tagged stool and fluid (ATT). Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of ATT on CTDI _vol and the effect of ATT on image noise while adjusting for other variables including abdominal circumference.

Results

CTDI_vol varied from 0.88 to 2.54 mGy. There was no significant correlation between CTDI_vol and ATT (p = 0.61). ATT did not significantly affect CTDI_vol (p = 0.93), while abdominal circumference was the only factor significantly affecting CTDI_vol (p < 0.001). Image noise ranged from 59.5 to 64.1 HU. The p value for the regression model explaining the noise was 0.38.

Conclusion

The amount of stool and fluid tagging does not significantly affect radiation exposure.

Available only for authorised users

Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, Heiken JP, Dachman A, Kuo MD, Menias CO, Siewert B, Cheema JI, Obregon RG, Fidler JL, Zimmerman P, Horton KM, Coakley K, Iyer RB, Hara AK, Halvorsen RA Jr, Casola G, Yee J, Herman BA, Burgart LJ, Limburg PJ (2008) Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med 359:1207–1217CrossRefPubMed

Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Smith RA, Brooks D, Andrews KS, Dash C, Giardiello FM, Glick S, Levin TR, Pickhardt P, Rex DK, Thorson A, Winawer SJ (2008) Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 58:130–160CrossRefPubMed

Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA (2005) Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 129:328–337CrossRefPubMed

van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, Nio CY, Determann RM, Tipker CA, Vos FM, Glas AS, Bartelsman JF, Bossuyt PM, Lameris JS, Stoker J (2002) CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 224:25–33CrossRefPubMed

Keat N (2005) Report 05016: CT scanner automatic exposure control systems. Available via http://www.impactscan.org/reports/Report05016. Accessed Mar 28 2010

Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C, Reiser MF, Becker CR (2006) Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. Am J Roentgenol 187:695–701CrossRef

Rizzo SM, Kalra MK, Maher MM, Blake MA, Toth TL, Saini S (2005) Do metallic endoprostheses increase radiation dose associated with automatic tube-current modulation in abdominal-pelvic MDCT? A phantom and patient study. Am J Roentgenol 184:491–496

Hara AK (2002) The future of colorectal imaging: computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 31:1045–1060CrossRefPubMed

Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG, Leonardi M, van Meerten EvP, Geleijns J, Jessen KA, Panzer W, Shrimpton PC, Tosi G (2004) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Report EUR 16262. Available via http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/index.htm. Accessed Mar 28 2010

10.

An S, Lee KH, Kim YH, Park SH, Kim HY, Kim SH, Kim N (2008) Screening CT colonography in an asymptomatic average-risk Asian population: a 2-year experience in a single institution. Am J Roentgenol 191:W100–W106CrossRef

11.

Hsieh J (2003) Preliminaries. In: Hsieh J (ed) Computed tomography: principles, design, artifacts, and recent advances. SPIE Optical Engineering Press, Bellingham, WA, p 34

12.

Soni NK, Cohn NA (2009) Strategies to reduce radiation dose in Philips multidetector computed tomography scanners. In: Mahesh M (ed) MDCT physics: the basics-technology, image quality and radiation dose. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, pp 125–130

13.

Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, Ghysen D, Van Dijck X, Mussen E, Venstermans C, Termote JL (2005) Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 237:213–223CrossRefPubMed

14.

Adams R, Bischof L (1994) Seeded region growing. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 16:641–647CrossRef

15.

Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (1992) Region-oriented segmentation. In: Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (eds) Digital image processing. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, pp 458–465

16.

Lee J, Kim G, Lee H, Shin B-S, Shin YG (2008) Fast path planning in virtual colonoscopy. Comput Biol Med 38:1012–1023

17.

Wyatt CL, Ge Y, Vining DJ (2000) Automatic segmentation of the colon for virtual colonoscopy. Comput Med Imaging Graph 24:1–9CrossRefPubMed

18.

Summers RM, Franaszek M, Miller MT, Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Schindler WR (2005) Computer-aided detection of polyps on oral contrast-enhanced CT colonography. Am J Roentgenol 184:105–108

19.

Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (1992) Dilation and erosion. In: Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (eds) Digital image processing. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, pp 518–524

20.

Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C, Kohlberg G, Hahn PF (2006) Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology 239:149–159CrossRefPubMed

21.

Prokop M (2003) Image analysis. In: Prokop M, Galanski M (ed) Computed tomography of the body. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany, p 143

Title: Does the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affect the radiation exposure in low-dose CT colonography performed with an automatic exposure control?
Authors: Hyun Kyong Lim
Kyoung Ho Lee
So Yeon Kim
Kil Joong Kim
Bohyoung Kim
Hyunna Lee
Seong Ho Park
Jeffrey H. Yanof
Seung-sik Hwang
Young Hoon Kim
Publication date: 01-02-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1922-4

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Does the amount of tagged stool and fluid significantly affect the radiation exposure in low-dose CT colonography performed with an automatic exposure control?

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2011

CT fluoroscopy-guided lung biopsy versus conventional CT-guided lung biopsy: a prospective controlled study to assess radiation doses and diagnostic performance

Clinical value of a combined multi-phase contrast enhanced DOPA-PET/CT in neuroendocrine tumours with emphasis on the diagnostic CT component

Simultaneous assessment of liver volume and whole liver fat content: a step towards one-stop shop preoperative MRI protocol

Fetal liver iron overload: the role of MR imaging

Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI/DWI image fusion for detection of malignant tumours: a comparison with PET/CT

Additional benefit of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the staging of oesophageal cancer