Utility of CT oral contrast administration in the emergency department of a quaternary oncology hospital: diagnostic implications, turnaround times, and assessment of ED physician ordering

Purpose To compare studies with and without oral contrast on performance of multidetector computed tomography (CT) and the order to CT examination turnaround time in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). To the best of our knowledge, oral contrast utility has not previously be...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Abdominal imaging 2017-11, Vol.42 (11), p.2760-2768
Hauptverfasser: Jensen, Corey T., Blair, Katherine J., Le, Ott, Sun, Jia, Wei, Wei, Korivi, Brinda Rao, Morani, Ajaykumar C., Wagner-Bartak, Nicolaus A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To compare studies with and without oral contrast on performance of multidetector computed tomography (CT) and the order to CT examination turnaround time in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). To the best of our knowledge, oral contrast utility has not previously been specifically assessed in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department. Materials & methods Retrospective review of CT abdomen examinations performed in oncology patients presenting to the emergency department during one month. CT examinations performed with and without oral contrast were rated by two consensus readers for degree of confidence and diagnostic ability. Correlations were assessed for primary cancer type, age, sex, chief complaint/examination indication, body mass index, intravenous contrast status, repeat CT examination within 4 weeks, and disposition. Turnaround times from order to the start of the CT examination were calculated. Results The studied group consisted of 267 patients (127 men and 140 women) with a mean age of 56 years and a mean body mass index of 27.8 kg/m 2 . One hundred sixty CT examinations were performed without oral contrast, and 107 CT examinations were performed with oral contrast. There was no significant difference between cases with oral contrast and cases without oral contrast in the number of cases rated as “improved confidence” (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–1.31, P  = 0.17), “improved diagnosis” (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.20–1.64, P  = 0.3), “impaired confidence” (OR 3.92, 95% CI 0.46–33.06, P  = 0.21), or “impaired diagnosis” (OR 2.63, 95% CI 0.29–23.89, P  = 0.39). The turnaround time in the group receiving oral contrast (mean, 141 min; standard deviation, 49.8 min) was significantly longer than that in the group not receiving oral contrast (mean, 109.2 min; standard deviation, 64.8 min) with a mean difference of 31.8 min ( P  
ISSN:2366-004X
2366-0058
DOI:10.1007/s00261-017-1175-7