Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33743100›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2021

Optimization of contrast medium volume for abdominal CT in oncologic patients: prospective comparison between fixed and lean body weight-adapted dosing protocols.

Damiano Caruso, Elisa Rosati, Nicola Panvini, Marco Rengo, Davide Bellini, Giulia Moltoni, Benedetta Bracci, Elena Lucertini, Marta Zerunian, Michela Polici and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Lean body weight-adjusted intravenous iodinated contrast dose for abdominal CT in dogs reduces interpatient enhancement variability while providing diagnostic quality organ enhancement.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Damiano CarusoRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Elisa RosatiRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Nicola PanviniDiagnostic Imaging Unit, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, ICOT Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Via Franco Faggiana, 1668, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Marco RengoDiagnostic Imaging Unit, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, ICOT Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Via Franco Faggiana, 1668, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Davide BelliniDiagnostic Imaging Unit, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, ICOT Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Via Franco Faggiana, 1668, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Giulia MoltoniRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Benedetta BracciRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Elena LucertiniRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Marta ZerunianRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Michela PoliciRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Domenico De SantisRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Elsa IannicelliRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Paolo AnibaldiHospital Direction and Clinical Departments, Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Iacopo CarboneDiagnostic Imaging Unit, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, ICOT Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Via Franco Faggiana, 1668, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Andrea LaghiRadiology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome - Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy. andrea.laghi@uniroma1.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3091-7819
Sapienza University of Rome · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Sant'Andrea · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient body size represents the main determinant of parenchymal enhancement and by adjusting the contrast media (CM) dose to patient weight may be a more appropriate approach to avoid a patient over dosage of CM. To compare the performance of fixed-dose and lean body weight (LBW)-adapted contrast media dosing protocols, in terms of image quality and parenchymal enhancement.

resultsOne-hundred cancer patients undergoing multiphasic abdominal CT were prospectively enrolled in this multicentric study and randomly divided in two groups: patients in fixed-dose group (n = 50) received 120 mL of CM while in LBW group (n = 50) the amount of CM was computed according to the patient's LBW. LBW protocol group received a significantly lower amount of CM (103.47 ± 17.65 mL vs. 120.00 ± 0.00 mL, p < 0.001). Arterial kidney signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and pancreatic CNR were significantly higher in LBW group (all p ≤ 0.004). LBW group provided significantly higher arterial liver, kidney, and pancreatic contrast enhancement index (CEI) and portal venous phase kidney CEI (all p ≤ 0.002). Significantly lower portal vein SNR and CNR were observed in LBW-Group (all p ≤ 0.020).

conclusionsLBW-adapted CM administration for abdominal CT reduces the volume of injected CM and improves both image quality and parenchymal enhancement.

Indexed as

AbdomenComputed tomographyContrast mediaLean body weightOncologic imaging

Identifiers

PMID33743100
PMCPMC7981367
OpenAlexW3136960285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.