Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objective: To assess the effectiveness of low contrast volume (LCV) chest CT performed with multiple contrast agents on multivendor CT with varying scanning techniques.
Methods: The study included 361 patients (65 ± 15 years; M: F 173:188) who underwent LCV chest CT on one of the six 64-256 detector-row CT scanners using single-energy (SECT) or dual-energy (DECT) modes. All patients were scanned with either a fixed-LCV (LCVf, n = 103) or weight-based LCV (LCVw, n = 258) protocol. Two thoracic radiologists independently assessed all LCV CT and patients' prior standard contrast volume (SCV, n = 263) chest CT for optimality of contrast enhancement in thoracic vasculature, cardiac chambers, and in pleuro-parenchymal and mediastinal abnormalities. CT attenuations were recorded in the main pulmonary trunk, ascending, and descending thoracic aorta. To assess the interobserver agreement, pulmonary arterial enhancement was divided into two groups: optimal or suboptimal.
Results: There was no significant difference among patients' BMI (p = 0.883) in the three groups. DECT had a significantly higher aortic arterial enhancement (250 ± 99HU vs 228 ± 76 HU for SECT, p < 0.001). Optimal enhancement was present in 558 of 624 chest CT (89.4%), whereas 66 of 624 chest CT with suboptimal enhancement was noted in 48 of 258 LCVw (18.6%) and 14 of 103 LCVf (13.6%). Most patients with suboptimal enhancement with LCVw injection protocol were overweight/obese (30/48; 62.5%), (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: LCV chest CT can be performed across complex multivendor, multicontrast media, multiscanner, and multiprotocol CT practices. However, LCV chest CT examinations can result in suboptimal contrast enhancement in patients with larger body habitus.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2023.03.020 | DOI Listing |