Contrast enhancement on 100- and 120 kVp hepatic CT scans at thin adults in a retrospective cohort study: Bayesian inference of the optimal enhancement probability.
Journal
Medicine
ISSN: 1536-5964
Titre abrégé: Medicine (Baltimore)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985248R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2019
Nov 2019
Historique:
entrez:
26
11
2019
pubmed:
26
11
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the probability of achieving optimal contrast enhancement in 100 kVp and 120 kVp-protocol on hepatic computed tomography (CT) scans. We enrolled 200 patients in a retrospective cohort study. Hundred patients were scanned with 120 kVp setting, and other 100 patients were scanned with 100 kVp setting. We measured the CT number in the abdominal aorta and hepatic parenchyma on unenhanced scans and hepatic arterial phase (HAP)-, and portal venous phase (PVP). The aortic enhancement at HAP and the hepatic parenchymal enhancement at PVP were compared between the two scanning protocols. Bayesian inference was used to assess the probability of achieving optimal contrast enhancement in each protocol. The Bayesian analysis indicated that when 100 kVp-rotocol was used, the probability of achieving optimal aortic enhancement (>280 HU) was 98.8% ± 0.6%, whereas it was 88.7% ± 2.5% when 120 kVp-protocol was used. Also, the probability of achieving optimal hepatic parenchymal enhancement (>50 HU) was 95.3% ± 1.5%, whereas it was 64.7% ± 3.8% when 120 kVp-protocol was used. Bayesian inference suggested that the post-test probability of optimal contrast enhancement at hepatic dynamic CT was lower under the 120 kVp than the 100 kVp-protocol.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31764788
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017902
pii: 00005792-201911220-00019
pmc: PMC6882564
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e17902Références
Stat Med. 2006 Nov 15;25(21):3589-631
pubmed: 16947924
Am J Kidney Dis. 2007 Dec;50(6):927-37
pubmed: 18037093
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997 May;168(5):1185-92
pubmed: 9129409
Radiology. 1995 Nov;197(2):357-63
pubmed: 7480677
Radiology. 2005 Dec;237(3):905-10
pubmed: 16237139
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2017 Mar/Apr;41(2):309-314
pubmed: 27759599
MD Comput. 1991 May-Jun;8(3):157-71
pubmed: 1857193
Cancer. 2009 Dec 1;115(23):5371-81
pubmed: 19691089
Radiology. 2000 Sep;216(3):718-23
pubmed: 10966700
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Jun;196(6):1332-8
pubmed: 21606297
Radiat Med. 2007 Jul;25(6):278-88
pubmed: 17634881
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Feb 20;35(6):681-687
pubmed: 28045624
Radiology. 2011 Nov;261(2):467-76
pubmed: 21852567
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995 Apr;164(4):879-84
pubmed: 7726040
Radiology. 2010 Jul;256(1):32-61
pubmed: 20574084
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Sep;167(3):753-7
pubmed: 8751695
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 May;208(5):1127-1133
pubmed: 28177650
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997 Jul;169(1):125-30
pubmed: 9207511
Meat Sci. 2005 Jan;69(1):115-22
pubmed: 22062646
Radiology. 2016 Mar;278(3):773-81
pubmed: 26356063
Radiology. 1995 May;195(2):353-7
pubmed: 7724752
Am J Kidney Dis. 2009 Jun;53(6):982-92
pubmed: 19339088