Split-Bolus Injection Producing Simultaneous Late Arterial and Portal Venous Phases in CT Enterography: Preliminary Results.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the image quality and added value of split-bolus contrast agent injection combining late arterial and portal venous phases compared with single-bolus contrast agent injection late arterial phase CT enterography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent CT enterography before and after implementation of a single-bolus CT enterography protocol were included. Attenuation and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were assessed by ROI measurements of the bowel wall and arterial and venous structures. Subjective enhancement of the bowel wall (1, arterial; 2, mucosal; 3, transmural; 4, transmural with mucosal hyperenhancement) and bowel abnormalities were assessed by two independent readers. MR enterography examinations, endoscopy reports, and surgery reports within 30 days after CT enterography were used to produce a composite outcome. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included in our study: 33 (mean [± SD] age, 46.0 ± 19.8 years) who underwent split-bolus CT enterography and 33 (mean age, 49.9 ± 19.0 years) who underwent single-bolus CT enterography. Bowel wall attenuation and CNR were higher for split-bolus CT enterography than for single-bolus CT enterography at 120 kVp (enhancement, 98.7 ± 23.1 HU vs 85.1 ± 23.3 HU; CNR, 6.4 ± 2.5 vs 4.4 ± 2.3; p < 0.01). Subjective ratings of bowel wall enhancement were higher with the split-bolus CT enterography than the single-bolus CT enterography (2.6 ± 0.8 vs 2.3 ± 0.6; p < 0.001). Split-bolus CT enterography led to a higher detection rate of mucosal hyperenhancement than did single-bolus CT enterography in patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (100.0% [7/7; 95% CI, 59.0-100.0%] vs 33.3% [2/6; 95% CI, 4.3-77.7%]; p = 0.02), whereas both protocols had a specificity of 100.0% (9/9). CONCLUSION: Split-bolus CT enterography led to improved CNR (47%) compared with single-bolus CT enterography and significantly increased the detection rate of mucosal hyperenhancement in patients with active inflammatory bowel disease.

Retroperitoneal Fasciitis: Spectrum of CT Findings in the Abdomen and Pelvis.

Retroperitoneal fasciitis is a rare but potentially lethal complication of infection. Early diagnosis is crucial and is usually made when there is a high degree of clinical suspicion combined with characteristic imaging findings leading to early surgical intervention. Computed tomography (CT) can play a central role in demonstrating early findings, assessing the extent of disease to help determine the best surgical approach, identifying the primary source of infection, and evaluating the treatment response. The possible presence of retroperitoneal fasciitis should be considered in patients presenting with symptoms of sepsis, including pain that is disproportionate with the clinical abnormality. When retroperitoneal fasciitis is suspected, emergency CT can facilitate early diagnosis and evaluation of the extent of disease. Common findings at CT include fascial thickening and enhancement, muscular edema, fat stranding, fluid collections, and abscess formation. Gas tracking along fascial planes in the retroperitoneum is the hallmark of retroperitoneal fasciitis but is not seen in all cases. Another important clue to the diagnosis is asymmetric involvement of the retroperitoneal fascial planes and deep tissues. Fasciitis in the retroperitoneum may originate from infected retroperitoneal organs or from infection that spreads along indirect and/or direct pathways from a primary source elsewhere in the body. Findings of indirect tracking and transgression of fascial planes may indicate more severe infection associated with the necrotizing form of retroperitoneal fasciitis. Despite aggressive antibiotic treatment, early and repeated surgical débridement may be required to remove nonviable tissue in patients with the necrotizing form of retroperitoneal fasciitis. Awareness of the anatomy of the retroperitoneum, potential routes of spread of infection, and the spectrum of CT findings in retroperitoneal fasciitis is needed to achieve prompt diagnosis and guide treatment.

Rapid imaging protocol in trauma: a whole-body dual-source CT scan.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a single acquisition whole-body trauma multi-detector CT scan is able to reduce resuscitation time, scan time, and effective radiation dose without compromising diagnostic quality in the setting of polytrauma. Retrospective analysis of 33 trauma patients undergoing single acquisition whole-body CT with injury severity scores of ≥ 16 was compared to 34 patients imaged with a segmented whole-body CT protocol. Time spent in the emergency department, effective radiation dose, image quality, and mortality rates were compared. The single acquisition group spent 53.7 % less time in the emergency department prior to imaging (p=0.0044) and decreased scanning time by 25 %. The protocol yielded a 24.5 % reduction in mean effective radiation dose (24.66 mSv vs. 32.67 mSv, p<0.0001). The image noise was similar in both groups. Standardized mortality ratios were comparable. The single acquisition protocol significantly reduces time spent in the emergency department by allowing faster imaging at a lower radiation dose while maintaining image quality. Other contributors to reduction in radiation dose include use of dual-source CT technology, removal of delayed CT intravenous pyelogram, and arm positioning.

Computed tomography identified factors that preclude living kidney donation.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the variety and prevalence of renal and non-renal abnormalities detected on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) that precluded patients from donating a kidney. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained and the requirement for informed consent was waived. A retrospective, single-centre review of 701 patients (444 female, 257 male; age range 18-86 years; mean age 43.2±11.9 years) that underwent renal donor protocol MDCT was conducted. A systematic review of the CT report, records from multidisciplinary renal transplantation rounds, and electronic medical records was performed to determine which patients were approved or declined as live renal donors. If declined as a donor, CT-identified reasons were categorized as abnormalities of renal vasculature, renal parenchyma, collecting system, or extra-renal. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were excluded as renal donors on the basis of CT findings. Abnormalities of the collecting system accounted for the most frequent cause of exclusion (n=41), with asymptomatic renal calculi being detected in 39 patients. Complex vascular anatomy and vascular abnormalities resulted in the exclusion of 29 patients. Supernumerary arteries and early arterial branching resulted in the exclusion of 20 patients, while renal vein anomalies leading to exclusion were uncommon (n=2). Abnormalities of renal parenchyma resulted in the exclusion of nine patients. Three patients were diagnosed with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, two patients had renal cell carcinoma, and two patients had areas of cortical scarring. A complex cystic lesion requiring surveillance imaging was encountered in one patient and a large area of renal infarction related to prior adrenalectomy was demonstrated in one patient. Extra-renal abnormalities leading to exclusion were limited to two patients with pulmonary nodules. CONCLUSIONS: MDCT plays a critical role in the preoperative assessment of potential renal donors by identifying contraindications to donor nephrectomy and providing accurate vascular mapping. This study is anticipated to be informative for those involved in the workup of potential living renal donors by quantifying the incidence and reasons for donor exclusion identified on CT.

MDCT vs. MRI for incidental pancreatic cysts: measurement variability and impact on clinical management.

PURPOSE: To investigate incidental pancreatic cysts (IPCs) size discrepancy in a cohort of patients receiving both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its impact on clinical management based on the 2010 American College of Radiology (ACR) guidelines. METHODS: This was a HIPAA-compliant, retrospective, IRB-approved study. Informed consent was waived. Patients with known IPCs and at least one case-pair, consisting of an abdominal CT and MRI examination within 180 days between 05/1999 and 12/2011, were included. Maximum diameter of cysts was measured in both the CT and MR examinations. A subset of 30 patients was measured by three radiologists independently to assess inter-observer variability. Absolute difference in diameter measurements between CT and MRI was calculated. Influence of cyst size, cyst location, and patient characteristics such as weight, height, and body mass index (BMI) on variability of size measurements were evaluated. Clinical impact in terms of current ACR guidelines was assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 267 case-pairs of cysts in 113 patients were included in this study. 59/267 cysts were visualized on MRI but not on CT (22.1%, 95% CI 17.1%-27.1%; 32 patients, 64.6 ± 11.7 years, BMI 28.5 ± 4.8 kg/m2), with a median MRI cyst size of 7.8 mm, IQR 6.0-9.0 mm, range 2-17.8 mm. 208 case-pairs in 113 patients with a mean BMI of 26.9 ± 5.1 kg/m2 (range 16.9-39.5 kg/m2) and mean cysts size of 13.4 ± 8.1 mm (range 3-49 mm) were seen in both CT and MRI. The mean absolute size difference for IPCs measured on MRI and CT was 2.1 ± 1.8 mm (median 1.5 mm, IQR 0.9-2.9 mm, range 0-9 mm). Absolute size difference between CT and MRI measurements increased with size of the cyst (r = 0.31, p < 0.001), whereas location of the cyst did not influence the absolute difference between CT and MRI measurements (p = 0.44). Patient weight and BMI had a negative correlation with the difference in cyst size between CT and MRI (weight r = -0.17, p = 0.023; BMI r = -0.17, p = 0.027), with cyst measurements being larger on MRI in thin patients and on CT in obese patients. Inter-reader variability was excellent (ICC = 0.99). In 12/208 (5.7%, 95% CI 2.7%-9.1%), variability between CT and MRI would have changed ACR-based follow-up recommendation. CONCLUSION: There was a median difference of 1.5 mm between measurements of IPCs on CT vs. MRI. If imaging modality was switched during follow-up, variability of measurements may lead to inappropriate change of follow-up regimen in 6% of all cases. A single follow-up CT for incidental IPCs does not seem sufficient due to a high number (22%) of missed IPCs on CT.

Rotator cuff troublemakers: pitfalls of MRI and ultrasound.

Rotator cuff pathology is routinely evaluated in many imaging centers with both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound. Despite good diagnostic accuracy using each of these modalities, certain limitations persist. In this pictorial essay, we describe five potential "troublemakers" of rotator cuff pathology which are recurrent themes in our busy shoulder referral center. The comparison of imaging findings on MRI and ultrasound are discussed. An awareness of these potential pitfalls will help improve radiologists' diagnostic accuracy of rotator cuff pathology, and allow the clinician to optimize imaging referral and better interpret the subsequent report.