AJR Get Involved! Join ARRS Today
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ichikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Araki, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ichikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Araki, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.04.0310
AJR 2006; 186:1413-1418
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Effect of Injection Rate of Contrast Material on CT of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Tomoaki Ichikawa1, Hiroto Nakajima1, Atsushi Nanbu1, Masaaki Hori1 and Tsutomu Araki1

1 All authors: Department of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, 1110 Shimokato, Tamaho, Nakakoma, Yamanashi 409-3898, Japan.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of two injection rates of contrast material (3 mL/sec and 5 mL/sec) in hepatic arterial dominant phase MDCT for the detection of small (< 2 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The injection rates 3 mL/sec and 5 mL/sec were used prospectively in imaging examinations of patients with the suspected diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Each group consisted of 30 patients by chance. The group that received injections at 3 mL/sec had 35 hepatocellular carcinoma lesions, and the 5 mL/sec group had 41 lesions. In all patients the dose and concentration of contrast material were 100 mL and 350 mg/mL iodine (total dose of iodine, 35 g). In each patient a mini-test-bolus technique was used with an additional 15 mL of contrast material to determine optimal scan delay after administration of contrast material. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to assess diagnostic performance with the two injection rates of contrast material.

RESULTS. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in regard to area under the curve and sensitivity. These values for the 3 mL/sec group were 0.97 and 28/35 (80%) and for the 5 mL/sec group were 0.96 and 36/41 (88%). However, the specificity and positive predictive values at 3 mL/sec (236/250 [95%] and 28/42 [67%]) were significantly higher than those at 5 mL/sec (227/265 [86%] and 36/73 [49%]) (p < 0.05). These results suggest there were more false-positive findings of contrast-enhanced lesions in cirrhotic livers on hepatic arterial dominant phase images obtained after injection of contrast material at 5 mL/sec than on images obtained after injection at 3 mL/sec.

CONCLUSION. In the detection of small hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic liver, the risk of false-positive findings of lesions on hepatic arterial dominant phase images is significantly greater with the higher injection rate (5 mL/sec) than with the medium rate (3 mL/sec).

Keywords: angiography • contrast media • CT • liver disease • MDCT


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
Y. Yanaga, K. Awai, T. Nakaura, T. Namimoto, S. Oda, Y. Funama, and Y. Yamashita
Optimal Contrast Dose for Depiction of Hypervascular Hepatocellular Carcinoma at Dynamic CT Using 64-MDCT
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 1003 - 1009.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.