Comparison of Two Neutral Oral Contrast Agents in Pediatric Patients: A Prospective Randomized Study.

Purpose To prospectively compare small bowel distention provided by, as well as patient acceptance of, two different neutral (negative) oral contrast materials used for cross-sectional enterography in a pediatric population. Materials and Methods In this noninferiority study, 66 pediatric patients undergoing clinical computed tomographic (CT) or magnetic resonance (MR) enterography were randomized to receive either a flavored beverage for neutral abdominal and pelvic imaging (Breeza; Beekley Medical, Bristol, Conn) or a low-density barium sulfate suspension. Patients were blinded to the oral contrast material administered and were asked to rate taste, texture, and their perceived health state (where 0 was very bad and 10 was very good). Ingested volume of the prescribed weight-based oral contrast material preparation was recorded. Maximum small bowel diameter was measured in all four abdominal quadrants. Mean bowel diameter as well as taste, texture, and health state scores were compared between cohorts by using t tests; proportions were compared by using Fisher exact tests. Results Thirty-three patients each received Breeza and barium sulfate suspension, respectively. No difference was found in age (Breeza, 13.5 years ± 2.6 [standard deviation]; barium sulfate suspension, 13.9 years ± 2.8; P = .49), sex distribution (15 girls each; P > .99), or health state (P = .21) between cohorts. Twenty-eight of 33 (84.8%) and 17 of 33 (51.5%) patients completed the Breeza and barium sulfate suspension preparations, respectively (P = .007). Breeza received higher scores for taste (6.1 ± 2.5 vs 2.7 ± 2.5; P < .0001) and texture (7.3 ± 2.3 vs 3.6 ± 2.9; P < .0001). No difference was found in bowel distention between Breeza and barium sulfate suspension (1.63 cm ± 0.24 vs 1.69 cm ± 0.25; P = .44). Conclusion The neutral oral contrast materials Breeza and low-density barium sulfate suspension provide similar small bowel distention. Patients receiving Breeza are more likely to ingest the entire prescribed volume.

Radiation dose reduction through combining positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and diagnostic CT in children and young adults with lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Both [F-18]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) and diagnostic CT are at times required for lymphoma staging. This means some body segments are exposed twice to X-rays for generation of CT data (diagnostic CT + localization CT). OBJECTIVE: To describe a combined PET/diagnostic CT approach that modulates CT tube current along the z-axis, providing diagnostic CT of some body segments and localization CT of the remaining body segments, thereby reducing patient radiation dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared total patient radiation dose between combined PET/diagnostic CT and separately acquired PET/CT and diagnostic CT exams. When available, we calculated effective doses for both approaches in the same patient; otherwise, we used data from patients of similar size. To confirm image quality, we compared image noise (Hounsfield unit [HU] standard deviation) as measured in the liver on both combined and separately acquired diagnostic CT images. We used t-tests for dose comparisons and two one-sided tests for image-quality equivalence testing. RESULTS: Mean total effective dose for the CT component of the combined and separately acquired diagnostic CT exams were 6.20±2.69 and 8.17±2.61 mSv, respectively (P<0.0001). Average dose savings with the combined approach was 24.8±17.8% (2.60±2.51 mSv [range: 0.32-4.72 mSv]) of total CT effective dose. Image noise was not statistically significantly different between approaches (12.2±1.8 HU vs. 11.7±1.5 HU for the combined and separately acquired diagnostic CT images, respectively). CONCLUSION: A combined PET/diagnostic CT approach as described offers dose savings at similar image quality for children and young adults with lymphoma who have indications for both PET and diagnostic CT examinations.