Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determination of optimal intravenous contrast agent iodine dose for the detection of liver metastasis at 80-kVp CT

  • Hepatobiliary-Pancreas
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To determine the optimal iodine mass (IM) to achieve a 50-HU increase in hepatic attenuation for the detection of liver metastasis based on total body weight (TBW) or body surface area (BSA) at 80-kVp computed tomography (CT) imaging of the liver.

Methods

One-hundred and fifty patients who underwent contrast-enhanced CT at 80-kVp were randomised into three groups: 0.5 gI/kg, 0.4 gI/kg and 0.3 gI/kg. Portal venous phase images were evaluated for hepatic parenchymal enhancement (∆HU) and visualisation of liver metastasis. Iodine mass per BSA (gI/m2) calculated in individual patients were evaluated.

Results

Mean ∆HU for the 0.5 gI/kg group (84.2 HU) was higher than in the 0.4 gI/kg (66.1 HU) and 0.3 gI/kg (53.7 HU) groups (P < 0.001). Linear correlation equations between ∆HU and IM per TBW or BSA are ∆HU = 7.0 + 153.0 × IM/TBW (r = 0.73, P < 0.001) and ∆HU = 11.4 + 4.0 × IM/BSA (r = 0.75, P < 0.001), respectively. The three groups were comparable for the visualisation of hepatic metastases.

Conclusions

The iodine mass to achieve a 50-HU increase in hepatic attenuation at 80-kVp CT was estimated to be 0.28 gI/kg of body weight or 9.6 gI/m2 of body surface area.

Key Points

• Hepatic enhancement is expressed as ∆HU = 7.0 + 153.0 × IM [g]/TBW [kg].

• Hepatic enhancement is expressed as ∆HU = 11.4 + 4.0 × IM [g]/BSA [m 2 ].

• Essential iodine dose at 80-kVp CT was 0.28 gI/kg or 9.6 gI/m 2 .

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yamashita Y, Komohara Y, Takahashi M, Uchida M, Hayabuchi N, Shimizu T, Narabayashi I (2000) Abdominal helical CT: evaluation of optimal doses of intravenous contrast material—a prospective randomized study. Radiology 216:718–723

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Awai K, Takada K, Onishi H, Hori S (2002) Aortic and hepatic enhancement and tumor-to-liver contrast: analysis of the effect of different concentrations of contrast material at multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 224:757–763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tublin ME, Tessler FN, Cheng SL, Peters TL, McGovern PC (1999) Effect of injection rate of contrast medium on pancreatic and hepatic helical CT. Radiology 210:97–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bae KT (2003) Peak contrast enhancement in CT and MR angiography: when does it occur and why? Pharmacokinetic study in a porcine model. Radiology 227:809–816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bae KT, Seeck BA, Hildebolt CF, Tao C, Zhu F, Kanematsu M, Woodard PK (2008) Contrast enhancement in cardiovascular MDCT: effect of body weight, height, body surface area, body mass index, and obesity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:777–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S, Watanabe H, Kawada H, Moriyama N, Bae KT (2013) Body size indices to determine iodine mass with contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography of the upper abdomen: does body surface area outperform total body weight or lean body weight? Eur Radiol 23:1855–1861

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 207:657–662

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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 195:353–357

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brooks RA (1977) A quantitative theory of the Hounsfield unit and its application to dual energy scanning. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1:487–493

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakaura T, Awai K, Maruyama N, Takata N, Yoshinaka I, Harada K, Uemura S et al (2011) Abdominal dynamic CT in patients with renal dysfunction: contrast agent dose reduction with low tube voltage and high tube current-time product settings at 256-detector row CT. Radiology 261:467–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Schmidt B, Westerman BL, Morgan HT, Saini S (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Goshima S, Kanematsu M, Kondo H, Yokoyama R, Miyoshi T, Nishibori H, Kato H et al (2006) MDCT of the liver and hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas: optimizing scan delays for bolus-tracking techniques of hepatic arterial and portal venous phases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:W25–W32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G (2000) Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology 217:430–435

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Marin D, Nelson RC, Samei E, Paulson EK, Ho LM, Boll DT, DeLong DM et al (2009) Hypervascular liver tumors: low tube voltage, high tube current multidetector CT during late hepatic arterial phase for detection—initial clinical experience. Radiology 251:771–779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, Richard S, Youngblood RS, Yoshizumi TT, Samei E (2010) Low-tube-voltage, high-tube-current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm—initial clinical experience. Radiology 254:145–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, Hatemura M, Imuta M, Nakaura T, Ryu D et al (2005) Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 237:945–951

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sigal-Cinqualbre AB, Hennequin R, Abada HT, Chen X, Paul JF (2004) Low-kilovoltage multi-detector row chest CT in adults: feasibility and effect on image quality and iodine dose. Radiology 231:169–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nakaura T, Nakamura S, Maruyama N, Funama Y, Awai K, Harada K, Uemura S et al (2012) Low contrast agent and radiation dose protocol for hepatic dynamic CT of thin adults at 256-detector row CT: effect of low tube voltage and hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm on image quality. Radiology 264:445–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Masayuki Kanematsu, M.D. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained. None of the study subjects or cohorts has been not previously reported. Methodology: prospective, diagnostic study, performed at one institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, 501-1194, Gifu, Japan

    Satoshi Goshima, Masayuki Kanematsu, Yoshifumi Noda, Hiroshi Kondo, Haruo Watanabe, Hiroshi Kawada, Nobuyuki Kawai & Yukichi Tanahashi

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Kyongtae T. Bae

Authors
  1. Satoshi Goshima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masayuki Kanematsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yoshifumi Noda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hiroshi Kondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Haruo Watanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hiroshi Kawada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nobuyuki Kawai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yukichi Tanahashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kyongtae T. Bae
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masayuki Kanematsu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goshima, S., Kanematsu, M., Noda, Y. et al. Determination of optimal intravenous contrast agent iodine dose for the detection of liver metastasis at 80-kVp CT. Eur Radiol 24, 1853–1859 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3227-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3227-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation