Nelson R C, Chezmar J L, Peterson J E, Bernardino M E
Department of Radiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989 Nov;153(5):973-6. doi: 10.2214/ajr.153.5.973.
We conducted a randomized, blinded, prospective study evaluating hepatic parenchymal density changes during dynamic bolus CT (180 ml of contrast material given IV) and delayed CT (5 hr after 60 g of iodine) in order to compare the enhancement characteristics of an ionic contrast agent (iothalamate-60) and two nonionic agents (iohexol-300 and iopamidol-300). A total of 75 patients with known or suspected cancer were studied (25 patients per contrast agent). After a baseline unenhanced CT scan was obtained, dynamic bolus and delayed CT scans were obtained for all patients with one of the three contrast agents. The density of the liver and spleen was measured in Hounsfield units (H) for unenhanced CT, dynamic bolus CT, and delayed CT. The average percentage of enhancement was calculated as follows: postcontrast density minus precontrast density was divided by precontrast density and then multiplied by 100. For dynamic bolus CT, the average percentage of enhancement of the liver was 105% when iohexol-300 was used, 98% when iopamidol-300 was used, and 83% when iothalamate-60 was used. No significant difference was seen between the postcontrast enhancement of the three contrast agents on dynamic bolus CT scans (p greater than .05). For delayed CT, the average percentage of enhancement of the liver was 34% when iothalamate-60 was used, 28% when iopamidol-300 was used, and 16% when iohexol-300 was used. Both iothalamate-60 and iopamidol-300 showed superior enhancement on delayed CT, compared with iohexol-300 (p = .0001). We conclude that for dynamic bolus CT, all three contrast agents are similar, with no statistically significant differences in postcontrast enhancement of the liver. For delayed CT, however, hepatic enhancement with iothalamate-60 and iopamidol-300 is statistically superior to that with iohexol-300.
我们进行了一项随机、双盲、前瞻性研究,评估动态团注CT(静脉注射180毫升造影剂)和延迟CT(60克碘后5小时)期间肝实质密度变化,以比较一种离子型造影剂(碘他拉酸盐-60)和两种非离子型造影剂(碘海醇-300和碘帕醇-300)的增强特性。共研究了75例已知或疑似癌症患者(每种造影剂25例)。在获得基线平扫CT扫描后,对所有患者使用三种造影剂之一进行动态团注和延迟CT扫描。在平扫CT、动态团注CT和延迟CT上,以亨氏单位(H)测量肝脏和脾脏的密度。增强平均百分比计算如下:对比剂后密度减去对比剂前密度,再除以对比剂前密度,然后乘以100。对于动态团注CT,使用碘海醇-300时肝脏增强平均百分比为105%,使用碘帕醇-300时为98%,使用碘他拉酸盐-60时为83%。在动态团注CT扫描上,三种造影剂对比剂后增强之间未见显著差异(p大于0.05)。对于延迟CT,使用碘他拉酸盐-60时肝脏增强平均百分比为34%,使用碘帕醇-300时为28%,使用碘海醇-300时为16%。与碘海醇-300相比,碘他拉酸盐-60和碘帕醇-300在延迟CT上均显示出更好的增强效果(p = 0.0001)。我们得出结论,对于动态团注CT,所有三种造影剂相似,肝脏对比剂后增强无统计学显著差异。然而,对于延迟CT,碘他拉酸盐-60和碘帕醇-300的肝脏增强在统计学上优于碘海醇-300。