OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS
A major disadvantage of computed tomography for abdominal screening in dogs has been the need for general anesthesia to prevent motion artifacts. With multidetector helical CT, it is possible to decrease examination time, allowing patients to be scanned under sedation. It is also desirable to decrea...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Veterinary radiology & ultrasound 2012-09, Vol.53 (5), p.507-512 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 512 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 507 |
container_title | Veterinary radiology & ultrasound |
container_volume | 53 |
creator | Fields, Erica L. Robertson, Ian D. Brown Jr, James C. |
description | A major disadvantage of computed tomography for abdominal screening in dogs has been the need for general anesthesia to prevent motion artifacts. With multidetector helical CT, it is possible to decrease examination time, allowing patients to be scanned under sedation. It is also desirable to decrease tube loading to prolong x‐ray tube life. To develop a protocol that will allow for examination of sedated patients with minimal image artifacts, milliamperage (mA) and helical pitch were varied, providing 16 experimental scan protocols. A standard clinical protocol was also tested, providing 17 protocols for evaluation. These protocols were tested, using a standard CT phantom, canine tissues in a water bath, and a canine cadaver. The cadaver images were scored semiquantitatively by three reviewers to determine the protocol with the best combination of speed and minimal image artifact. The optimized protocol was then applied to 27 sedated canine patients of three body weight categories. The images obtained were compared to the standard protocol by two reviewers for presence of motion, streak, and quantum mottle artifacts. There was significantly more streak artifact noted by one observer using the optimized study protocol, but no significant difference in any other category. Scanning under sedation was well tolerated in all patients, and sedated CT examination is a promising tool for screening abdominal disease in dogs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01950.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1039202040</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1039202040</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4070-5f1dc55844845f9e8e98b3d4aa6e66ff4957475bbda6bedca41711a4185ed4393</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM2O0zAURi0EYoaBV0BZskmwHTt2FixMmmkjJXZpXEawsfLjiJZ2OsRT0Xl7HDp0jRf2le_57pUOAAGCEfLn4zZCjMCQ4wRFGCIcQZRSGJ1egOtL46WvIeUhRzy-Am-c20KIKcPsNbjCvo8xx9fgh1rqoiq-C10oGajbIFNSr0Stw1wuhMzyWVCtS13Mcp1nWq0C8XmmqkKK0pPVcq09oFWl5iuxXHwLChnU-UxMv5mQhcyDpZ-cS12_Ba-GZufsu-f3Bqxvc50twlLNi0yUYUcggyEdUN9RygnhhA6p5TblbdyTpklskgwDSSkjjLZt3ySt7buGIIaQvzm1PYnT-AZ8OM99GA-_jtY9mv3GdXa3a-7t4egMgnGKIYYEepSf0W48ODfawTyMm30zPnnITJ7N1kw6zaTTTJ7NX8_m5KPvn7cc273tL8F_Yj3w6Qz83uzs038PNl9X66ny-fCc37hHe7rkm_GnSVjMqLmTc6PTel7i-ou5i_8AykKR-A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1039202040</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Fields, Erica L. ; Robertson, Ian D. ; Brown Jr, James C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fields, Erica L. ; Robertson, Ian D. ; Brown Jr, James C.</creatorcontrib><description>A major disadvantage of computed tomography for abdominal screening in dogs has been the need for general anesthesia to prevent motion artifacts. With multidetector helical CT, it is possible to decrease examination time, allowing patients to be scanned under sedation. It is also desirable to decrease tube loading to prolong x‐ray tube life. To develop a protocol that will allow for examination of sedated patients with minimal image artifacts, milliamperage (mA) and helical pitch were varied, providing 16 experimental scan protocols. A standard clinical protocol was also tested, providing 17 protocols for evaluation. These protocols were tested, using a standard CT phantom, canine tissues in a water bath, and a canine cadaver. The cadaver images were scored semiquantitatively by three reviewers to determine the protocol with the best combination of speed and minimal image artifact. The optimized protocol was then applied to 27 sedated canine patients of three body weight categories. The images obtained were compared to the standard protocol by two reviewers for presence of motion, streak, and quantum mottle artifacts. There was significantly more streak artifact noted by one observer using the optimized study protocol, but no significant difference in any other category. Scanning under sedation was well tolerated in all patients, and sedated CT examination is a promising tool for screening abdominal disease in dogs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-8183</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1740-8261</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01950.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22612282</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Computed tomography technique ; Conscious Sedation - veterinary ; Contrast Media ; Dogs - anatomy & histology ; Liver - diagnostic imaging ; Multidetector ; Multidetector Computed Tomography - veterinary ; Phantoms, Imaging - veterinary ; Radiographic Image Enhancement ; Radiography, Abdominal - veterinary ; Rapid examination ; Sedated dogs ; Spleen - diagnostic imaging</subject><ispartof>Veterinary radiology & ultrasound, 2012-09, Vol.53 (5), p.507-512</ispartof><rights>2012 Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound</rights><rights>2012 Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4070-5f1dc55844845f9e8e98b3d4aa6e66ff4957475bbda6bedca41711a4185ed4393</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4070-5f1dc55844845f9e8e98b3d4aa6e66ff4957475bbda6bedca41711a4185ed4393</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1740-8261.2012.01950.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1740-8261.2012.01950.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22612282$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fields, Erica L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robertson, Ian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown Jr, James C.</creatorcontrib><title>OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS</title><title>Veterinary radiology & ultrasound</title><addtitle>Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound</addtitle><description>A major disadvantage of computed tomography for abdominal screening in dogs has been the need for general anesthesia to prevent motion artifacts. With multidetector helical CT, it is possible to decrease examination time, allowing patients to be scanned under sedation. It is also desirable to decrease tube loading to prolong x‐ray tube life. To develop a protocol that will allow for examination of sedated patients with minimal image artifacts, milliamperage (mA) and helical pitch were varied, providing 16 experimental scan protocols. A standard clinical protocol was also tested, providing 17 protocols for evaluation. These protocols were tested, using a standard CT phantom, canine tissues in a water bath, and a canine cadaver. The cadaver images were scored semiquantitatively by three reviewers to determine the protocol with the best combination of speed and minimal image artifact. The optimized protocol was then applied to 27 sedated canine patients of three body weight categories. The images obtained were compared to the standard protocol by two reviewers for presence of motion, streak, and quantum mottle artifacts. There was significantly more streak artifact noted by one observer using the optimized study protocol, but no significant difference in any other category. Scanning under sedation was well tolerated in all patients, and sedated CT examination is a promising tool for screening abdominal disease in dogs.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Computed tomography technique</subject><subject>Conscious Sedation - veterinary</subject><subject>Contrast Media</subject><subject>Dogs - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Liver - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Multidetector</subject><subject>Multidetector Computed Tomography - veterinary</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging - veterinary</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Enhancement</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - veterinary</subject><subject>Rapid examination</subject><subject>Sedated dogs</subject><subject>Spleen - diagnostic imaging</subject><issn>1058-8183</issn><issn>1740-8261</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkM2O0zAURi0EYoaBV0BZskmwHTt2FixMmmkjJXZpXEawsfLjiJZ2OsRT0Xl7HDp0jRf2le_57pUOAAGCEfLn4zZCjMCQ4wRFGCIcQZRSGJ1egOtL46WvIeUhRzy-Am-c20KIKcPsNbjCvo8xx9fgh1rqoiq-C10oGajbIFNSr0Stw1wuhMzyWVCtS13Mcp1nWq0C8XmmqkKK0pPVcq09oFWl5iuxXHwLChnU-UxMv5mQhcyDpZ-cS12_Ba-GZufsu-f3Bqxvc50twlLNi0yUYUcggyEdUN9RygnhhA6p5TblbdyTpklskgwDSSkjjLZt3ySt7buGIIaQvzm1PYnT-AZ8OM99GA-_jtY9mv3GdXa3a-7t4egMgnGKIYYEepSf0W48ODfawTyMm30zPnnITJ7N1kw6zaTTTJ7NX8_m5KPvn7cc273tL8F_Yj3w6Qz83uzs038PNl9X66ny-fCc37hHe7rkm_GnSVjMqLmTc6PTel7i-ou5i_8AykKR-A</recordid><startdate>201209</startdate><enddate>201209</enddate><creator>Fields, Erica L.</creator><creator>Robertson, Ian D.</creator><creator>Brown Jr, James C.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201209</creationdate><title>OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS</title><author>Fields, Erica L. ; Robertson, Ian D. ; Brown Jr, James C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4070-5f1dc55844845f9e8e98b3d4aa6e66ff4957475bbda6bedca41711a4185ed4393</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Computed tomography technique</topic><topic>Conscious Sedation - veterinary</topic><topic>Contrast Media</topic><topic>Dogs - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Liver - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Multidetector</topic><topic>Multidetector Computed Tomography - veterinary</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging - veterinary</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Enhancement</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - veterinary</topic><topic>Rapid examination</topic><topic>Sedated dogs</topic><topic>Spleen - diagnostic imaging</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fields, Erica L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robertson, Ian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown Jr, James C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Veterinary radiology & ultrasound</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fields, Erica L.</au><au>Robertson, Ian D.</au><au>Brown Jr, James C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS</atitle><jtitle>Veterinary radiology & ultrasound</jtitle><addtitle>Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound</addtitle><date>2012-09</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>507</spage><epage>512</epage><pages>507-512</pages><issn>1058-8183</issn><eissn>1740-8261</eissn><abstract>A major disadvantage of computed tomography for abdominal screening in dogs has been the need for general anesthesia to prevent motion artifacts. With multidetector helical CT, it is possible to decrease examination time, allowing patients to be scanned under sedation. It is also desirable to decrease tube loading to prolong x‐ray tube life. To develop a protocol that will allow for examination of sedated patients with minimal image artifacts, milliamperage (mA) and helical pitch were varied, providing 16 experimental scan protocols. A standard clinical protocol was also tested, providing 17 protocols for evaluation. These protocols were tested, using a standard CT phantom, canine tissues in a water bath, and a canine cadaver. The cadaver images were scored semiquantitatively by three reviewers to determine the protocol with the best combination of speed and minimal image artifact. The optimized protocol was then applied to 27 sedated canine patients of three body weight categories. The images obtained were compared to the standard protocol by two reviewers for presence of motion, streak, and quantum mottle artifacts. There was significantly more streak artifact noted by one observer using the optimized study protocol, but no significant difference in any other category. Scanning under sedation was well tolerated in all patients, and sedated CT examination is a promising tool for screening abdominal disease in dogs.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>22612282</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01950.x</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1058-8183 |
ispartof | Veterinary radiology & ultrasound, 2012-09, Vol.53 (5), p.507-512 |
issn | 1058-8183 1740-8261 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1039202040 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Animals Computed tomography technique Conscious Sedation - veterinary Contrast Media Dogs - anatomy & histology Liver - diagnostic imaging Multidetector Multidetector Computed Tomography - veterinary Phantoms, Imaging - veterinary Radiographic Image Enhancement Radiography, Abdominal - veterinary Rapid examination Sedated dogs Spleen - diagnostic imaging |
title | OPTIMIZATION OF CONTRAST-ENHANCED MULTIDETECTOR ABDOMINAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN SEDATED CANINE PATIENTS |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T18%3A39%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=OPTIMIZATION%20OF%20CONTRAST-ENHANCED%20MULTIDETECTOR%20ABDOMINAL%20COMPUTED%20TOMOGRAPHY%20IN%20SEDATED%20CANINE%20PATIENTS&rft.jtitle=Veterinary%20radiology%20&%20ultrasound&rft.au=Fields,%20Erica%20L.&rft.date=2012-09&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=507&rft.epage=512&rft.pages=507-512&rft.issn=1058-8183&rft.eissn=1740-8261&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01950.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1039202040%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1039202040&rft_id=info:pmid/22612282&rfr_iscdi=true |