Implementation of patient-tailored contrast volumes based on body surface area and heart rate harmonizes contrast enhancement and reduces contrast load in small patients in portal venous phase abdominal CT

Adjustments of iodinated contrast media using lean body weight for abdominopelvic computed tomography: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to compare the effect of contrast media (CM) dose adjustment based on lean body weight (LBW) method versus other calculation protocols for abdominopelvic CT examinations.

METHOD

Studies published from 2002 onwards were systematically searched in June 2024 across Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, Google Scholar and four other grey literature sources, with no language limit. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCT of abdominopelvic or abdominal CT examinations in adults with contrast media injection for oncological and acute diseases were included. The comparators were other contrast dose calculation methods such as total body weight (TBW), fixed volume (FV), body surface area (BSA), and blood volume. The main outcomes considered were liver and aortic enhancement. Titles, abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included from a total of 2029 articles identified. Liver parenchyma and aorta contrast enhancement did not significantly differ between LBW and TBW protocols (p = 0.07, p = 0.06, respectively). However, the meta-analysis revealed significantly lower contrast volume injected with LBW protocol when compared to TBW protocol (p = 0.003). No statistical differences were found for contrast enhancement and contrast volume between LBW and the other strategies.

CONCLUSION

Calculation of the CM dosage based on LBW allows a reduction in the injected volume for abdominopelvic CT examination, ensuring the same image quality in terms of contrast enhancement.

Effect of patient characteristics on aortic attenuation in iodinated contrast-enhanced Abdominopelvic CT: A retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Contrast Enhanced Computed Tomography (CECT) abdomen and pelvis is a common imaging procedure. Hospitals typically follow fixed protocols of contrast volume administration for triple-phase CECT abdomen and pelvis scans and have found that patients are either underdosed or overdosed with respect to their body habitus. The aim of the study was to correlate different patient characteristics such as Total body weight (TBW), Lean Body Mass (LBM), Body Mass Index (BMI), Body Surface Area (BSA) and Blood Volume (BV) with aortic enhancement in the arterial and portal venous phases for CECT Abdomen and pelvis.

METHODS

A total of 106 patients who underwent triple-phase CECT abdomen & pelvis were retrospectively studied. A circular region-of-interest (ROI) of 100 mm2 was positioned on descending aorta for unenhanced, arterial, and portal venous phases to measure the aortic enhancement in Hounsfield's units. Measure of contrast attenuation (ΔH) was calculated from the difference of CT values on unenhanced images and contrast images. Correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the relation of patient body characteristics with aortic enhancement.

RESULTS

Correlation analysis revealed that BMI exhibited the least correlation when compared to the other characteristics in both arterial (r = -0.3; p = 0.002) and portovenous phases (r = -0.35; p < 0.001) whereas TBW, LBW, BSA and BV reported moderate inverse correlations. BV was found to be the strongest of all characteristics under linear regression.

CONCLUSION

The study supports the use of protocols that adjust contrast volume to either TBW, LBW, BSA, or BV for CT abdomen and pelvis scan.

IMPLICATION OF PRACTICE

The right body parameter ensures optimal contrast enhancement, improving the visualization of anatomical structures and helps in adapting tailored contrast injection protocols.

The impact of body compositions on contrast medium enhancement in chest CT: a randomised controlled trial

Objective

To compare a fixed-volume contrast medium (CM) protocol with a combined total body weight (TBW) and body composition-tailored protocol in chest CT.

Methods and materials

Patients referred for routine contrast enhanced chest CT were prospectively categorised as normal, muscular or overweight. Patients were accordingly randomised into two groups; Group 1 received a fixed CM protocol. Group 2 received CM volume according to a body composition-tailored protocol. Objective image quality comparisons between protocols and body compositions were performed. Differences between groups and correlation were analysed using t-test and Pearson's r.

Results

A total of 179 patients were included: 87 in Group 1 (mean age, 51 ± 17 years); and 92 in Group 2 (mean age, 52 ± 17 years). Compared to Group 2, Group 1 showed lower vascular attenuation in muscular (mean 346 Hounsfield unit (HU) vs 396 HU; p = 0.004) and overweight categories (mean 342 HU vs 367 HU; p = 0.12), while normal category patients showed increased attenuation (385 vs 367; p = 0.61). In Group 1, strongest correlation was found between attenuation and TBW in muscular (r = -.49, p = 0.009) and waist circumference in overweight patients (r = -.50, p = 0.005). In Group 2, no significant correlations were found for the same body size parameters. In Group 1, 13% of the overweight patients was below 250 HU (p = 0.053).

Conclusion

A combined TBW and body composition-tailored CM protocol in chest CT resulted in more homogenous enhancement and fewer outliers compared to a fixed-volume protocol.

Advances in knowledge

This is, to our knowledge, the first study to investigate the impact of various body compositions on contrast medium enhancement in chest CT.

Strategies for calculating contrast media dose for chest CT

BACKGROUND

Total body weight (TBW) is a frequently used contrast media (CM) strategy for dose calculation in enhanced CT, yet it is suboptimal as it lacks consideration of patient characteristics, such as body fat percentage (BFP) and muscle mass. Alternative CM dosage strategies are suggested by the literature. Our objectives were to analyze the CM dose impact when adjusting to body composition using methods of obtaining lean body mass (LBM) and body surface area (BSA) along with its correlation with demographic factors in contrast enhanced chest CT examinations.

METHODS

Eighty-nine adult patients referred for CM thoracic CT were retrospectively included, categorized as either normal, muscular, or overweight. Patient body composition data was used to calculate the CM dose according to LBM or BSA. LBM was calculated with the James method, Boer method, and bioelectric impedance (BIA). BSA was calculated using the Mostellar formula. We then correlated the corresponding CM doses with demographic factors.

RESULTS

BIA demonstrated the highest and lowest calculated CM dose in muscular and overweight groups respectively, compared to other strategies. For the normal group, the lowest calculated CM dose was achieved using TBW. The calculated CM dose was more closely correlated with BFP using the BIA method.

CONCLUSIONS

The BIA method is more adaptive to variations in patient body habitus especially in muscular and overweight patients and is most closely correlated to patient demographics. This study could support utilizing the BIA method for calculating LBM for a body-tailored CM dose protocol for enhanced chest CT examinations.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The BIA-based method is adaptive to variations in body habitus especially in muscular and overweight patients and is closely correlated to patient demographics for contrast-enhanced chest CT.

KEY POINTS

• Calculations based on BIA showed the largest variation in CM dose. • Lean body weight using BIA demonstrated the strongest correlation to patient demographics. • Lean body weight BIA protocol may be considered for CM dosing in chest CT.

Individualized Contrast Media Application Based on Body Weight and Contrast Enhancement in Computed Tomography of Livers without Steatosis

This study analyzes the homogeneity in liver attenuation of a body-weight-based protocol compared to a semi-fixed protocol. Patients undergoing abdominal multiphase computed tomography received 0.500 g of iodine (gI) per kilogram of body weight. Liver attenuation and enhancement were determined using regions of interest on scans in the pre-contrast and portal venous phases. The outcomes were analyzed for interpatient uniformity in weight groups. The subjective image quality was scored using a four-point Likert scale (excellent, good, moderate, and nondiagnostic). A total of 80 patients were included (56.3% male, 64 years, 78.0 kg) and were compared to 80 propensity-score-matched patients (62.5% male, 63 years, 81.7 kg). The liver attenuation values for different weight groups of the TBW-based protocol were not significantly different (p = 0.331): 109.1 ± 13.8 HU (≤70 kg), 104.6 ± 9.70 HU (70−90 kg), and 105.1 ± 11.6 HU (≥90 kg). For the semi-fixed protocol, there was a significant difference between the weight groups (p < 0.001): 121.1 ± 12.1 HU (≤70 kg), 108.9 ± 11.0 HU (70−90 kg), and 105.0 ± 9.8 HU (≥90 kg). For the TBW-based protocol, the enhancement was not significantly different between the weight groups (p = 0.064): 46.2 ± 15.1 HU (≤70 kg), 59.3 ± 6.8 HU (70−90 kg), and 52.1 ± 11.7 HU (≥90 kg). Additionally, for the semi-fixed protocol, the enhancement was not significantly different between the weight groups (p = 0.069): 59.4 ± 11.0 HU (≤70 kg), 53.0 ± 10.3 HU (70−90 kg), and 52.4 ± 7.5 HU (≥90 kg). The mean administered amount of iodine per kilogram was less for the TBW-based protocol compared to the semi-fixed protocol: 0.499 ± 0.012 and 0.528 ± 0.079, respectively (p = 0.002). Of the TBW-based protocol, 17.5% of the scans scored excellent enhancement quality, 76.3% good, and 6.3% moderate. Of the semi-fixed protocol, 70.0% scored excellent quality, 21.3% scored good, and 8.8% scored moderate. In conclusion, the TBW-based protocol increased the interpatient uniformity of liver attenuation but not the enhancement in the portal venous phase compared to the semi-fixed protocol, using an overall lower amount of contrast media and maintaining good subjective image quality.

Prospective multicenter study on personalized and optimized MDCT contrast protocols: results on liver enhancement

OBJECTIVE

To determine a personalized and optimized contrast injection protocol for a uniform and optimal diagnostic level of liver parenchymal enhancement, in a large patient population enrolled in a multicenter study.

METHODS

Six hundred ninety-two patients who underwent a standardized multi-phase liver CT examination were prospectively assigned to one contrast media (CM) protocol group: G1 (100 mL fixed volume, 37 gI); G2 (600 mgI/kg of total body weight (TBW)); G3 (750 mgI/kg of fat-free mass (FFM)), and G4 (600 mgI/kg of FFM). Change in liver parenchyma CT number between unenhanced and contrast-enhanced images was measured by two radiologists, on 3-mm pre-contrast and portal phase axial reconstructions. The enhancement histograms were compared across CM protocols, specifically according to a target diagnostic value of 50 HU. The total amount of iodine dose was also compared among protocols by median and interquartile range (IQR). The Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to assess significant differences (p < 0.005), as appropriate.

RESULTS

A significant difference (p < 0.001) was found across the groups with liver enhancement decreasing from median over-enhanced values of 77.0 (G1), 71.3 (G2), and 65.1 (G3) to a target enhancement of 53.2 HU for G4. Enhancement IQR was progressively reduced from 26.5 HU (G1), 26.0 HU (G2), and 17.8 HU (G3) to 14.5 HU (G4). G4 showed a median iodine dose of 26.0 gI, significantly lower (p < 0.001) than G3 (33.9 gI), G2 (38.8 gI), and G1 (37 gI).

CONCLUSIONS

The 600 mgI/kg FFM-based protocol enabled a diagnostically optimized liver enhancement and improved patient-to-patient enhancement uniformity, while significantly reducing iodine load.

KEY POINTS

• Consistent and clinically adequate liver enhancement is observed with personalized and optimized contrast injection protocol. • Fat-free mass is an appropriate body size parameter for correlation with liver parenchymal enhancement. • Diagnostic oncology follow-up liver CT examinations may be obtained using 600 mgI/kg of FFM.

Lean body weight versus total body weight to calculate the iodinated contrast media volume in abdominal CT: a randomised controlled trial

Objectives

Iodinated contrast media (ICM) could be more appropriately dosed on patient lean body weight (LBW) than on total body weight (TBW).

Methods

After Ethics Committee approval, trial registration NCT03384979, patients aged ≥ 18 years scheduled for multiphasic abdominal CT were randomised for ICM dose to LBW group (0.63 gI/kg of LBW) or TBW group (0.44 gI/kg of TBW). Abdominal 64-row CT was performed using 120 kVp, 100–200 mAs, rotation time 0.5 s, pitch 1, Iopamidol (370 mgI/mL), and flow rate 3 mL/s. Levene, Mann–Whitney U, and χ² tests were used. The primary endpoint was liver contrast enhancement (LCE).

Results

Of 335 enrolled patients, 17 were screening failures; 44 dropped out after randomisation; 274 patients were analysed (133 LBW group, 141 TBW group). The median age of LBW group (66 years) was slightly lower than that of TBW group (70 years). Although the median ICM-injected volume was comparable between groups, its variability was larger in the former (interquartile range 27 mL versus 21 mL, p = 0.01). The same was for unenhanced liver density (IQR 10 versus 7 HU) (p = 0.02). Median LCE was 40 (35–46) HU in the LBW group and 40 (35–44) HU in the TBW group, without significant difference for median (p = 0.41) and variability (p = 0.23). Suboptimal LCE (< 40 HU) was found in 64/133 (48%) patients in the LBW group and 69/141 (49%) in the TBW group, but no examination needed repeating.

Conclusions

The calculation of the ICM volume to be administered for abdominal CT based on the LBW does not imply a more consistent LCE.