Advertisement

MDCT pp 333-354 | Cite as

MDCT in Children: Scan Techniques and Contrast Issues

  • Donald P. Frush

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) is an essential imaging modality in the evaluation of infants and children [1]. Technical advances, especially with multidetector-array CT (MDCT) have provided increased opportunities for established uses as well as for new applications, such as evaluation of possible appendicitis, renal colic, and cardiovascular abnormalities. However, these technical advances are often complex and can be confusing. This complexity arises from the equipment, with increasing numbers of channels or arrays, and from the scan technique, consisting of multiple options for scan settings and intravenous (IV) contrast medium administration. Only with a solid understanding of these technical considerations will diagnostic MDCT in children be optimized. Therefore, this chapter focuses on the technical aspects of MDCT rather than on its applications. In addition to this technical discussion, issues in patient safety related to MDCT are addressed, including radiation management as a fundamental responsibility of the radiologist and radiology personnel [2].

Keywords

Compute Tomography Angiography Compute Tomography Colonography Helical Compute Tomography Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Tube Current Modulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Donnelly LF, Frush DP (2003) Pediatric multidetector body CT. Radiol Clin North Am 41:637–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frush DP, Frush KS (2006) In a new kind of light: patient safety in pediatric radiology. Clin Ped Emerg Med 7:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donnelly LF (1997) Commentary: oral contrast medium administration for abdominal CT-reevaluating the benefits and disadvantages in the pediatric patient. Pediatr Radiol 27:770CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaste S, Laningham F, Stazzone M et al (2007) Safety in pediatric MR and cardiac CT. Pediatr Radiol 37:409–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frush DP (2005) Multislice CT-Pediatric Principles and Protocols. In: Knollman F, Coakley FV, eds. Elsevier Inc., Philadelphia, PA, 179–201Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen MD, Smith JA (1994) Intravenous use of ionic and nonionic contrast agents in children. Radiology 191:793PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dillman JR, Strouse PJ, Ellis JH et al (2007) Incidence and severity of acute allergic-like reactions to i.v. nonionic iodinated contrast material in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(6):1643–1647. Erratum in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007 Sep; 189(3):512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaca AM, Frush DP, Hohenhaus S et al (2007) Enhancing pediatric safety: using simulation to assess radiology resident preparedness for anaphylaxis from intravenous contrast media. Radiology 245:236–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    UNSCEAR (2000) Medical radiation exposures, annex D. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Report to the General Assembly; New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Frush DP, Applegate K (2004) Computed tomography and radiation: Understanding the issues. J Am Coll of Radiol 1:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure. NEJM 357:2277–2284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frush DP, Donnelly LF, Rosen N (2003) CT and radiation risks: What pediatric health care providers should know. Pediatrics 112:951–957CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE et al (2007) American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 4:272–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Slovis TL, Frush DP, Berdon WE et al (2007) Biological Effects of Diagnostic Radiation on Children. In: Slovis T (ed) Caffey’s Pediatric Diagnostic Imaging. 11th Edition. Elsevier 3–12Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frush DP (2006) Categorical Course in Physics: Radiation Dose and Image Quality for Pediatric CT: clinical considerations. Radiological Society of North American 167–182Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thomas KE, Wang BB (2008) Age-specific effective doses for Pediatric MSCT examinations at a large children’s hospital using DLP conversion coefficients; a simple estimation method. Pediatr Radiol (In press)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huda W, Vance A (2007) Patient radiation doses from adult and pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:540–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huda W (2008) Computing effective doses to pediatric patients undergoing body CT examinations. Pediatr Radiol (In press)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cohen RA, Frush DP, Donnelly LF (2000) Data acquisition for pediatric CT angiography: problems and solutions. Pediatr Radiol 30:813–822CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fleischmann D (2003) Use of high-concentration contrast media in multiple-detector-row CT: principles and rationale. Eur Radiol 13 (Suppl 5):M14–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frush DP, Herlong RJ (2005) Pediatric thoracic CT angiography. Pediatr Radiol 35:11–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chan FP, Rubin GD (2005) MDCT angiography of pediatric vascular diseases of the abdomen, pelvis, and extremities. Pediatr Radiol 35:40–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salis AI, Eclavea A, Johnson MS et al (2004) Maximal flow rates possible during power injection through currently available PICCs: an in vitro study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 15:275–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hollingsworth CL, Frush DP, Cross M et al (2003) Helical CT of the body: A survey of techniques used for pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:401–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Frush DP, Donnelly LF, Bisset GS (2001) Technical innovation: Effect of scan delay on hepatic enhancement for pediatric abdominal multislice helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:1559–1561PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frush DP, Spencer EB, Donnelly LF et al (1999) Optimizing contrast-enhanced abdominal CT in infants and children using bolus tracking. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:1007PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Frush DP (2005) Technique of pediatric thoracic CT angiography. Radiol Clin North Am 43(2):419–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    da Costa e Silva EJ, da Silva GA (2007) Eliminating unenhanced CT when evaluating abdominal neoplasms in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1211–1214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    van der Molen AJ, Geleijns J (2007) Overranging in multisection CT: quantification and relative contribution to dose-comparison of four 16-section CT scanners. Radiology 242:208–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS et al (2001) Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: Strategies at a large children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176(2):303–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Arch ME, Frush DP (2008) Pediatric Body MDCT: A Five-Year Follow-Up Survey of Scan Parameters Used by Pediatric Radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol February 2008 (In press)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vade A, Demos TC, Olson MC et al (1996) Evaluation of image quality using 1∶1 pitch and 1∶51 pitch helical CT in children: a comparative study. Pediatr Radiol 26:891–893PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vade A, Olson MC, Vittore CP et al (1999) Hepatic enhancement analysis in children using Smart Prep monitoring for 2:1 pitch helical scanning. Pediatr Radiol 29:689–693CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Long FR, Castile RG, Brody AS et al (1999) Lungs in infants and young children: improved thin-section computed tomography with a noninvasive controlled-ventilation technique: initial experience. Radiology 212:588–593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Siegel MS (2003) Multiplanar and three-dimensional multidetector row CT of thoracic vessels and airways in the pediatric population. Radiology 229:641–650CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lucaya J, Piqueras J, García-Peña P et al (2000) Lowdose high-resolution CT of the chest in children and young adults: dose cooperation, artifact incidence, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:985–992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rogalla P, Stover B, Scheer I et al (1999) Low-dose spiral CT; applicability to paediatric chest imaging. Pediatr Radiol 29:565–569CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ambrosino MM, Genieser NB, Roche KJ et al (1994) Feasibility of high-resolution, low-dose chest CT in evaluating the pediatric chest. Pediatr Radiol 24:6–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pacharn P, Poe SA, Donnelly LF (2002) Low-tubecurrent multidetector CT for children with suspected extrinsic airway compression. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1523–1527PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cohnen M, Fischer H, Hamacher J et al (2000) CT of the head by reduced current and kilovoltage: relationship between image quality and dose reduction. Am J Neuroradiol 21:1654–1660PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hein E, Rogalla P, Klingebiel R et al (2002) Low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses with eye lens protection: effect on image quality and radiation dose. Eur Radiol 12:1693–1696CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mulkens TH, Broers C, Fieuws S (2005) Comparison of effective doses for low-dose MDCT and radiographic examination of sinuses in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1611–1618PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Salamipour H, Jimenez RM, Brec SL et al (2005) Multidetector row CT in pediatric musculoskeletal imaging. Pediatr Radiol 35:555–564CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chapman VM, Kalra M, Halpern E et al (2004) 16-MDCT of the posttraumatic pediatric elbow: optimum parameters and associated radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:516–521Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Anupindi S, Perumpillichira J, Jaramillo D et al (2005) Low-dose CT colonography in children: initial experience, technical feasibility, and utility. Pediatr Radiol 35:518–524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Greess H, Nömayr A, Wolf H et al (2002) Dose reduction in CT examination of children by an attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current (CARE Dose). Eur Radiol 12:1571–1576CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Greess H, Wolf H, Baum U et al (2000) Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions. Eur Radiol 10:391–394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Greess H, Lutze J, Nomayr A et al (2004) Dose reduction in subsecond multislice spiral CT examination of children by online tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 14:995–999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Geleijns J, Salvadó Artells M, Veldkamp WJ et al (2006) Quantitative assessment of selective in-plane shielding of tissues in computed tomography through evaluation of absorbed dose and image quality. Eur Radio 16:2334–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fricke BL, Donnelly LF, Frush DP et al (2003) In-Plane bismuth breast shields for pediatric CT: effects on dose and imaging quality using experimental and clinical data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:407–411PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Coursey C, Frush D, Yoshizumi T et al (2008) Pediatric chest MDCT and tube current modulation: effect on radiation dose with breast shielding. Pediatric chest MDCT using tube current modulation: effect on radiation dose with breast shielding. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald P. Frush
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations