Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a reduced tube potential (100 kVp) for non-enhanced abdominal low-dose CT on radiation dose and image quality (IQ) in the detection of body packing.
Methods
This retrospective study was approved by the local research ethics committee of our clinic. From March 2012 to July 2014, 99 subjects were referred to our institute with suspected body packing. 50 CT scans were performed using a 120 kVp protocol (group A), and 49 CTs were performed using a low-dose protocol with a tube voltage of 100 kVp (group B). Subjective and objective IQ were assessed. DLP and CTDIvol were analyzed.
Results
All examinations were of diagnostic IQ. Objective IQ was not significantly different between the 120 kVp and 100 kVp protocol. Mean density of solid and liquid body packets was 210 ± 60.2 HU at 120 kVp and 250.6 ± 29.7 HU at 100 kVp. Radiation dose was significantly lower in group B as compared to group A (p < 0.05). In group A, body packs were detected in 16 (32%) of the 50 patients. In group B, packets were observed in 15 (31%) of 49 patients. Laboratory analysis detected cocaine in all smuggled body packs.
Conclusions
Low-tube voltage 100 kVp MDCT with automated tube current modulation in screening of illegal drugs leads to a diagnostic IQ and significant dose reduction compared to 120 kVp low-tube voltage protocols. Despite lower radiation dose, liquid and solid cocaine containers retain high attenuation and are easily detected.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gherardi R, Marc B, Alberti X, Baud F, Diamant-Berger O (1990) A cocaine body packer with normal abdominal plain radiograms. Value of drug detection in urine and contrast study of the bowel. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 11(2):154–157
June R, Aks SE, Keys N, Wahl M (2000) Medical outcome of cocaine bodystuffers. J Emerg Med 18(2):221–224
Bulakci M, Kalelioglu T, Bulakci BB, Kiris A (2013) Comparison of diagnostic value of multidetector computed tomography and X-ray in the detection of body packing. Eur J Radiol. 82:1248–1254
Algra PR, Brogdon BG, Marugg RC (2007) Role of radiology in a national initiative to interdict drug smuggling: the Dutch experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(2):331–336
Niewiarowski S, Gogbashian A, Afaq A, Kantor R, Win Z (2010) Abdominal X-ray signs of intra-intestinal drug smuggling. J Forensic Leg Med 17(4):198–202
Norfolk GA (2007) The fatal case of a cocaine body-stuffer and a literature review—towards evidence based management. J Forensic Leg Med. 14(1):49–52
Traub SJ, Hoffman RS, Nelson LS (2003) Body packing–the internal concealment of illicit drugs. N Engl J Med 349(26):2519–2526
Taheri MS, Hassanian-Moghaddam H, Birang S, et al. (2008) Swallowed opium packets: CT diagnosis. Abdom Imaging 33(3):262–266
Wetli CV, Mittlemann RE (1981) The “body packer syndrome”-toxicity following ingestion of illicit drugs packaged for transportation. J Forensic Sci 26(3):492–500
Yang RM, Li L, Feng J, et al. (2009) Heroin body packing: clearly discerning drug packets using CT. South Med J 102(5):470–475
Poletti PA, Canel L, Becker CD, et al. (2012) Screening of illegal intracorporeal containers (“body packing”): is abdominal radiography sufficiently accurate? A comparative study with low-dose CT. Radiology 265(3):772–779
Pache G, Einhaus D, Bulla S, et al. (2012) Low-dose computed tomography for the detection of cocaine body packs: clinical evaluation and legal issues. Rofo 184(2):122–129
Maurer MH, Niehues SM, Schnapauff D, et al. (2011) Low-dose computed tomography to detect body-packing in an animal model. Eur J Radiol 78(2):302–306
Poletti PA, Platon A, Rutschmann OT, et al. (2007) Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(4):927–933
Platon A, Jlassi H, Rutschmann OT, et al. (2009) Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis. Eur Radiol 19(2):446–454
Keyzer C, Tack D, de Maertelaer V, et al. (2004) Acute appendicitis: comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology 232(1):164–172
McNitt-Gray MF (2002) AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 22(6):1541–1553
Prokop M (2000) Multislice CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 36(2):86–96
Båth M, Månsson LG (2007) Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation. Br J Radiol 80(951):169–176
Tamm EP, Rong XJ, Cody DD, et al. (2011) Quality initiatives: CT radiation dose reduction: how to implement change without sacrificing diagnostic quality. Radiographics 31(7):1823–1832
The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. Report No. 96. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, College Park (2008).
Schulz B, Grossbach A, Gruber-Rouh T, et al. (2014) Body packers on your examination table: how helpful are plain X-ray images? A definitive low-dose CT protocol as a diagnosis tool for body packers. Clin Radiol 69(12):e525–e530
Tack D, Sourtzis S, Delpierre I, de Maertelaer V, Gevenois PA (2003) Low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT of patients with suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180(2):305–311
Kluner C, Hein PA, Gralla O, et al. (2006) Does ultra-low-dose CT with a radiation dose equivalent to that of KUB suffice to detect renal and ureteral calculi? J Comput Assist Tomogr 30(1):44–50
Traub SJ, Hoffman RS, Nelson LS (2003) False-positive abdominal radiography in a body packer resulting from intraabdominal calcifications. Am J Emerg Med 21(7):607–608
Mettler FA, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M (2008) Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248(1):254–263
Schmidt S, Hugli O, Rizzo E, et al. (2008) Detection of ingested cocaine-filled packets–diagnostic value of unenhanced CT. Eur J Radiol 67(1):133–138
Hergan K, Kofler K, Oser W (2004) Drug smuggling by body packing: what radiologists should know about it. Eur Radiol 14(4):736–742
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aissa, J., Rubbert, C., Boos, J. et al. Low-tube voltage 100 kVp MDCT in screening of cocaine body packing: image quality and radiation dose compared to 120 kVp MDCT. Abdom Imaging 40, 2152–2158 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0464-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0464-2