Split-bolus single-phase versus single-bolus split-phase CT acquisition protocols for staging in patients with testicular cancer : A retrospective study
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved..
INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) imaging has become indispensable in the management of medical oncology patients. Risks associated with high cumulative effective dose (CED) are relevant in testicular cancer patients. Split-bolus protocols, whereby the contrast medium injection is divided into two, followed by combining the required phase images in a single scan acquisition has been shown to provide images of comparable image quality and less radiation dose compared to single-bolus split-phase CT for various indications. We retrospectively evaluated the performance of split-bolus and single-bolus protocols in patients having follow-up CT imaging for testicular cancer surveillance.
METHODS: 45 patients with testicular cancer undergoing surveillance CT imaging of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis who underwent split-bolus and single-bolus protocols were included. Quantitative image quality analysis was conducted by placing region of interests in pre-defined anatomical sub-structures within the abdominal cavity. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and radiation dose in the form of dose length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED) were recorded.
RESULTS: The DLP and ED for the single-bolus, split-phase acquisition was 506 ± 89 mGy cm and 7.59 ± 1.3 mSv, respectively. For the split-bolus, single-phase acquisition, 397 ± 94 mGy∗cm and 5.95 ± 1.4 mSv, respectively (p < 0.000). This represented a 21.5 % reduction in radiation dose exposure. The SNR for liver, muscle and fat for the single-bolus were 7.4, 4.7 and 8, respectively, compared to 5.5, 3.8 and 7.4 in the split-bolus protocol (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In a testicular cancer patient cohort undergoing surveillance CT imaging, utilization of a split-bolus single-phase acquisition CT protocol enabled a significant reduction in radiation dose whilst maintaining subjective diagnostic acceptability.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Use of split-bolus, single-phase acquisition has the potential to reduce CED in surveillance of testicular cancer patients.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:30 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Radiography (London, England : 1995) - 30(2024), 2 vom: 15. März, Seite 628-633 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
O'Regan, P W [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Adult |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 08.03.2024 Date Revised 08.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.radi.2024.01.020 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM368203808 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM368203808 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240308232500.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240209s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.radi.2024.01.020 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1320.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM368203808 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38330895 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1078-8174(24)00033-6 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a O'Regan, P W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Split-bolus single-phase versus single-bolus split-phase CT acquisition protocols for staging in patients with testicular cancer |b A retrospective study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 08.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 08.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) imaging has become indispensable in the management of medical oncology patients. Risks associated with high cumulative effective dose (CED) are relevant in testicular cancer patients. Split-bolus protocols, whereby the contrast medium injection is divided into two, followed by combining the required phase images in a single scan acquisition has been shown to provide images of comparable image quality and less radiation dose compared to single-bolus split-phase CT for various indications. We retrospectively evaluated the performance of split-bolus and single-bolus protocols in patients having follow-up CT imaging for testicular cancer surveillance | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: 45 patients with testicular cancer undergoing surveillance CT imaging of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis who underwent split-bolus and single-bolus protocols were included. Quantitative image quality analysis was conducted by placing region of interests in pre-defined anatomical sub-structures within the abdominal cavity. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and radiation dose in the form of dose length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED) were recorded | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: The DLP and ED for the single-bolus, split-phase acquisition was 506 ± 89 mGy cm and 7.59 ± 1.3 mSv, respectively. For the split-bolus, single-phase acquisition, 397 ± 94 mGy∗cm and 5.95 ± 1.4 mSv, respectively (p < 0.000). This represented a 21.5 % reduction in radiation dose exposure. The SNR for liver, muscle and fat for the single-bolus were 7.4, 4.7 and 8, respectively, compared to 5.5, 3.8 and 7.4 in the split-bolus protocol (p < 0.001) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: In a testicular cancer patient cohort undergoing surveillance CT imaging, utilization of a split-bolus single-phase acquisition CT protocol enabled a significant reduction in radiation dose whilst maintaining subjective diagnostic acceptability | ||
| 520 | |a IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Use of split-bolus, single-phase acquisition has the potential to reduce CED in surveillance of testicular cancer patients | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Adult | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Computed tomography methods | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Human | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Radiation dosage | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Tomography | |
| 650 | 4 | |a X-Ray | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Contrast Media |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dewhurst, C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a O'Mahony, A T |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a O'Regan, C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a O'Leary, V |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a O'Connor, G |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ryan, D |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Maher, M M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Young, R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Radiography (London, England : 1995) |d 1998 |g 30(2024), 2 vom: 15. März, Seite 628-633 |w (DE-627)NLM095446265 |x 1532-2831 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:30 |g year:2024 |g number:2 |g day:15 |g month:03 |g pages:628-633 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2024.01.020 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 30 |j 2024 |e 2 |b 15 |c 03 |h 628-633 | ||