Volume and radiation dose of CT Urogram over 5 years: Lessons learnt from a University Hospital

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. e3031
Author(s):  
A. Pietropaolo ◽  
A. Ho ◽  
F. Wall ◽  
R. Geraghty ◽  
T. Bryant ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 112972982199726
Author(s):  
Kikutaro Tokairin ◽  
Toshiya Osanai ◽  
Noriyuki Fujima ◽  
Kinya Ishizaka ◽  
Hiroaki Motegi ◽  
...  

Background: Inferior petrosal sinus (IPS) sampling (IPSS) is a transvenous interventional procedure performed to diagnose Cushing’s disease. The reported IPSS failure rate is approximately 10% because IPS catheter delivery is conducted blindly and is challenging because of IPS anatomical variations. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of preprocedural magnetic resonance venography (MRV) for assessing IPS access routes before IPSS. Methods: Nineteen consecutive patients who underwent IPSS at a single university hospital in Japan were retrospectively studied. A preprocedural MRV protocol optimized to visualize the IPS before IPSS was established and utilized in the eight most recent cases. An IPSS procedure was considered successful when bilateral IPS catheterization was accomplished. Patient demographics, IPSS success rate, and radiation dose required during IPSS were compared between two groups: MRV group ( N = 8) and no-MRV group ( N = 11) before IPSS. Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, and IPSS success rates between the groups. The average radiation dose was 663.6 ± 246.8 (SD) mGy and 981.7 ± 389.5 (SD) mGy in the MRV group and no-MRV group, respectively. Thus, there was a significant reduction in radiation exposure in the MRV group ( p = 0.044). Catheterization of the left IPS was unsuccessful in only one patient in the MRV group owing to IPS hypoplasty, as found on the MRV. Conclusions: Hypoplastic IPSs occur in patients and can complicate IPSS. Preprocedural MRV assessment is useful for understanding venous anatomy and preventing unnecessary intravenous catheter manipulation during IPSS, which involves blind manipulation around the IPS.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. e3030
Author(s):  
A. Pietropaolo ◽  
A. Ho ◽  
F. Wall ◽  
R. Geraghty ◽  
T. Bryant ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 292-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Francisco Tavares Romano ◽  
Priscila Silveira Salvadori ◽  
Lucas Rios Torres ◽  
Elisa Almeida Sathler Bretas ◽  
Daniel Bekhor ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:To assess the reduction of estimated radiation dose in abdominal computed tomography following the implementation of new scan protocols on the basis of clinical suspicion and of adjusted images acquisition parameters.Materials and Methods:Retrospective and prospective review of reports on radiation dose from abdominal CT scans performed three months before (group A – 551 studies) and three months after (group B – 788 studies) implementation of new scan protocols proposed as a function of clinical indications. Also, the images acquisition parameters were adjusted to reduce the radiation dose at each scan phase. The groups were compared for mean number of acquisition phases, mean CTDIvol per phase, mean DLP per phase, and mean DLP per scan.Results:A significant reduction was observed for group B as regards all the analyzed aspects, as follows: 33.9%, 25.0%, 27.0% and 52.5%, respectively for number of acquisition phases, CTDIvol per phase, DLP per phase and DLP per scan (p < 0.001).Conclusion:The rational use of abdominal computed tomography scan phases based on the clinical suspicion in conjunction with the adjusted images acquisition parameters allows for a 50% reduction in the radiation dose from abdominal computed tomography scans.


2015 ◽  
Vol 357 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 252-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhu Nagappa ◽  
Yasha T. Chickabasaviah ◽  
Anita Mahadevan ◽  
Raja Parthiban ◽  
Arun B. Taly

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung-Su Kim ◽  
◽  
Joun-Hyuk Lee ◽  
Hae-Kyoung Jung ◽  
Jung-Min Kim ◽  
...  

1994 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 241
Author(s):  
Tatsuo Nagasaka ◽  
Kouichi Chida ◽  
Masahiro Sai ◽  
Noriko Sugano ◽  
Hiroyasu Arima

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 627-634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jungsu Kim ◽  
Yongsu Yoon ◽  
Deoknam Seo ◽  
Soonmu Kwon ◽  
Jina Shim ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document