Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 20, Issue 7, pp 1644–1650 | Cite as

Intra-individual comparison of different contrast media concentrations (300 mg, 370 mg and 400 mg iodine) in MDCT

  • Florian F. BehrendtEmail author
  • Hubertus Pietsch
  • Gregor Jost
  • Martin A. Sieber
  • Sebastian Keil
  • Cedric Plumhans
  • Peter Seidensticker
  • Rolf W. Günther
  • Andreas H. Mahnken
Contrast Media

Abstract

Objective

To compare intra-individual contrast enhancement in multi-detector-row computed tomography (MDCT) using contrast media (CM) containing 300, 370 and 400 mg iodine per ml (mgI/ml).

Methods

Six pigs underwent repeated chest MDCT using three different CM (iopromide 300, iopromide 370, iomeprol 400). An identical iodine delivery (IDR) rate of 1.5 gI/s and a constant total iodine dose of 300 mg/kg body weight were used. Dynamic CT were acquired at the level of the pulmonary artery, and the ascending and descending aorta. After the time enhancement curves were computed, the pulmonary and aortic peak enhancement, time to peak and plateau time above 300 HU were calculated.

Results

Intra-individual peak contrast enhancement was significantly higher for the 300 mgI/ml contrast medium compared with the 370 and 400 mgI/ml media: pulmonary trunk 595 HU vs 516 HU (p = 0.0093) vs 472HU (p = 0.0005), and aorta 505 HU vs 454 HU (p = 0.0008) vs 439 HU (p = 0.0001), respectively. Comparison of time to peaks showed no significant difference. Plateau times were significantly longer for the 300 mgI/ml than for the 370 and 400 mgI/ml CM at all anatomical sites.

Conclusion

Given normalised IDR and total iodine burden, the use of CM with a standard concentration with 300 mg iodine/ml provides improved contrast enhancement compared with highly concentrated CM in the chest.

Keywords

Contrast media Computed tomography Intraindividual comparison Iodine concentration Administration and dosage Reproducibility of results 

References

  1. 1.
    Awai K, Hiraishi K, Hori S (2004) Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Radiology 230:142–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA (1998) Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part II. Effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Radiology 207:657–662PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA (1998) Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part I. Prediction with a computer model. Radiology 207:647–655PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA (1998) Aortic and hepatic peak enhancement at CT: effect of contrast medium injection rate—pharmacokinetic analysis and experimental porcine model. Radiology 206:455–464PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brink JA, Heiken JP, Forman HP, Sagel SS, Molina PL, Brown PC (1995) Hepatic spiral CT: reduction of dose of intravenous contrast material. Radiology 197:83–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brink JA (2003) Use of high concentration contrast media (HCCM): principles and rationale—body CT. Eur J Radiol 45(Suppl 1):S53–S58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Han JK, Kim AY, Lee KY et al (2000) Factors influencing vascular and hepatic enhancement at CT: experimental study on injection protocol using a canine model. J Comput Assist Tomogr 24:400–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, Sagel SS, Forman HP, DiCroce J (1993) Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT of the liver: comparison of contrast medium injection rates and uniphasic and biphasic injection protocols. Radiology 187:327–331PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, Sagel SS, Crowe TM, Gaines MV (1995) Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 195:353–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fleischmann D (2003) Use of high concentration contrast media: principles and rationale-vascular district. Eur J Radiol 45(Suppl 1):S88–S93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fleischmann D (2003) High-concentration contrast media in MDCT angiography: principles and rationale. Eur Radiol 13 Suppl 3:N39–N43Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Prokop M (2000) Multislice CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 36:86–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cademartiri F, de Monye C, Pugliese F et al (2006) High iodine concentration contrast material for noninvasive multislice computed tomography coronary angiography: iopromide 370 versus iomeprol 400. Invest Radiol 41:349–353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Setty BN, Sahani DV, Ouellette-Piazzo K, Hahn PF, Shepard JA (2006) Comparison of enhancement, image quality, cost, and adverse reactions using 2 different contrast medium concentrations for routine chest CT on 16-slice MDCT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:818–822CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Furuta A, Ito K, Fujita T, Koike S, Shimizu A, Matsunaga N (2004) Hepatic enhancement in multiphasic contrast-enhanced MDCT: comparison of high— and low-iodine-concentration contrast medium in same patients with chronic liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:157–162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rist C, Nikolaou K, Kirchin MA et al (2006) Contrast bolus optimization for cardiac 16-slice computed tomography: comparison of contrast medium formulations containing 300 and 400 milligrams of iodine per milliliter. Invest Radiol 41:460–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Benner T, Heiland S, Erb G, Forsting M, Sartor K (1997) Accuracy of gamma-variate fits to concentration-time curves from dynamic susceptibility-contrast enhanced MRI: influence of time resolution, maximal signal drop and signal-to-noise. Magn Reson Imaging 15:307–317CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muhlenbruch G, Behrendt FF, Eddahabi MA et al (2008) Which Iodine concentration in chest CT?—a prospective study in 300 patients. Eur Radiol 18:2826–2832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chambers TP, Baron RL, Lush RM, Dodd GD 3rd, Miller WJ, Confer SR (1993) Hepatic CT enhancement: a method to demonstrate reproducibility. Radiology 188:627–631PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chambers TP, Baron RL, Lush RM, Dodd GD 3rd, Miller WJ (1994) Hepatic CT enhancement: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents in the same patients. Radiology 190:721–725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Awai K, Inoue M, Yagyu Y et al (2004) Moderate versus high concentration of contrast material for aortic and hepatic enhancement and tumor-to-liver contrast at multi-detector row CT. Radiology 233:682–688CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Behrendt FF, Mahnken AH, Stanzel S et al (2008) Intraindividual comparison of contrast media concentrations for combined abdominal and thoracic MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:145–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Behrendt FF, Plumhans C, Keil S et al (2009) Contrast enhancement in chest multidetector computed tomography: intraindividual comparison of 300 mg/ml versus 400 mg/ml iodinated contrast medium. Acad Radiol 16:144–149CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jacobs JE, Birnbaum BA, Langlotz CP (1998) Contrast media reactions and extravasation: relationship to intravenous injection rates. Radiology 209:411–416PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Federle MP, Chang PJ, Confer S, Ozgun B (1998) Frequency and effects of extravasation of ionic and nonionic CT contrast media during rapid bolus injection. Radiology 206:637–640PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florian F. Behrendt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hubertus Pietsch
    • 2
  • Gregor Jost
    • 2
  • Martin A. Sieber
    • 2
  • Sebastian Keil
    • 1
  • Cedric Plumhans
    • 1
  • Peter Seidensticker
    • 2
  • Rolf W. Günther
    • 1
  • Andreas H. Mahnken
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University HospitalRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  2. 2.Bayer Schering Pharma AGBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Applied Medical Engineering, Helmholtz-Institute for Biomedical EngineeringRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations