Advertisement

Imaging the Bariatric Patient

  • Raul N. Uppot
Chapter

Abstract

Acquiring diagnostic medical images in bariatric patients may be challenging. Although adjustments can be made to currently available imaging equipment to accommodate larger patients, these adjustments come at an increased risk to the patient, with increasing doses of radiation, and risks to technologists who have to move, adjust, and properly position the patient. Understanding the limitations of the various studies, properly deciding on which imaging modality to use, and adjusting imaging protocols can help address many issues encountered when imaging the bariatric patient.

Keywords

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Obese Patient Gastric Bypass Surgery Improve Image Quality Bariatric Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Rundle RL. U.S.’s obesity woes put a strain on hospitals in unexpected ways. WSJ online edition. 2002. http://www.karlloren.com/diet/p6.htm. Accessed 25 Mar 2010.
  2. 2.
    Diconsiglio J. Hospitals equip to meet the bariatric challenge. Rising number of obese patients necessitates specific supplies. Mater Manag Health Care. 2006; 15(4):36–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    National Task Force on the Prevention and Treatment of Obesity. Medical care for obese patients: advice for health care professionals. Am Fam Physician. 2002; 65(1):81–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Uppot RN, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, et al. Effect of obesity on image quality: fifteen-year longitudinal study for evaluation of dictated radiology reports. Radiology. 2006;240:435–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uppot RN, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, et al. Impact of obesity on medical imaging and image-guided intervention. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(2): 433–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uppot RN. Impact of obesity on radiology. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007;45(2):231–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Uppot RN, Sheehan A, Seethamraju R. MRI hot topic: obesity and MR imaging. Malvern, PA: Siemens Medical Solutions; 2005.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar S, Moro L, Narayan Y. Perceived physical stress at work and musculoskeletal discomfort in X-ray technologists. Ergonomics. 2004;47(2):189–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Personal communication Richard Benedikt, MD. March 2010.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Choudry S, Gorman B, Charboneau JW, Tradup DJ, Beck RJ, Kofler JM, et al. Comparison of tissue harmonic imaging with conventional US in abdominal disease. Radiographics. 2000;20(4):1127–35.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shapiro RS, Wagreich J, Parsons RB, et al. Tissue harmonic imaging sonography: evaluation of image quality compared with conventional sonography. Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:1203–6.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hann LE, Bach AM, Cramer LD, et al. Hepatic sonography: comparison of tissue harmonic and standard sonography techniques. Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173: 201–6.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vannier MW. MDCT of massively obese patients in Stanford radiology. Presented at the 8th annual international symposium on multidetector-row CT. Stanford (CA). 14–17 June 2006.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vannier MW, Johnson PJ, Dachman A, et al. Multidetector CT of massively obese patients. Presented at the 2005 meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). Chicago (IL). 27 Nov–12 Dec, 2005.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yanch JC, Behrman RH, Hendricks MJ, McCall JH. Increased radiation dose to overweight and obese patients from radiographic examinations. Radiology. 2009;252(1):128–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kalra M, Schmidt B, Suess C, et al. Comparison of single and dual source 64 channel MDCT scanner for evaluation of large patients: a phantom study. Presented at the 2005 meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). Chicago (IL). Nov 27–Dec 12, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guest AR, Helvie MA, Chan HP, Hadjiiski LM, Bailey JE, Roubidoux MA. Adverse effects of increased body weight on quantitative measures of mammographic image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:805–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Abdominal Imaging & InterventionMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations