Publications

Detailed Information

Renal protection CT protocol using low-dose and low-concentration iodine contrast medium in at-risk patients of HCC and with chronic kidney disease: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorYoon, Jeong Hee-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Jin Young-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Sang Min-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Eun Sun-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Jae Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jeong Min-
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-30T00:57:12Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-30T09:57:33Z-
dc.date.issued2023-10-19-
dc.identifier.citationCancer Imaging, Vol.23(1):100ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn1470-7330-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/195797-
dc.description.abstractBackground Although efforts have been made to reduce the dose of Contrast Medium (CM) to improve patient
safety, there are ongoing concerns regarding its potential effects on image quality and diagnostic performance.
Moreover, research is lacking to establish a lower limit for safe and effective CM dose reduction. To determine whether
the image quality of contrast-enhanced liver computed tomography (CT) using a reduced amount of iodinated CM
was similar to that of standard liver CT.
Methods We enrolled participants at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma with decreased estimated glomerular filtration
rates (<60 mL/min/1.73m2
). Participants were randomly assigned to the standard group or the renal protection
protocol (RPP) group. In the standard group, images were reconstructed using hybrid iterative reconstruction
(iDose), while in the RPP group, low monoenergetic (50-keV) images and deep learning (DL)-based iodine-boosting
reconstruction were used. Four radiologists independently assessed image quality and lesion conspicuity.
Results Fifty-two participants were assigned to the standard (n=25) or RPP (n=27) groups. The iodine load was
significantly lower in the RPP group than in the standard group (301.5±1.71 vs. 524±7.37 mgI/kg, P<0.001). The
50-keV and DL-based iodine-boosting images from the RPP group exhibited higher image contrast than those from
the standard group during arterial (3.60±0.65, 3.75±0.60, and 3.09±0.43, respectively) and portal venous phases
(4.01±0.49, 3.86±0.42, and 3.21±0.31, respectively) (P<0.05 for all). Overall image quality was superior in the RPP
group (P<0.05 for all). No significant difference in lesion conspicuity was observed (P>0.017).
Conclusions The reduction in image contrast and overall image quality caused by decreased CM can be restored
using either low monoenergetic imaging or DL-based iodine-boosting reconstruction.
ko_KR
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was funded by Riyeon Pharmaceuticals (Seoul, Republic of Korea, grant No 1902-023-1008).ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherBMCko_KR
dc.titleRenal protection CT protocol using low-dose and low-concentration iodine contrast medium in at-risk patients of HCC and with chronic kidney disease: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trialko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s40644-023-00616-0ko_KR
dc.citation.journaltitleCancer Imagingko_KR
dc.language.rfc3066en-
dc.rights.holderInternational Cancer Imaging Society (ICIS)-
dc.date.updated2023-10-22T03:15:01Z-
dc.citation.endpage15ko_KR
dc.citation.number1ko_KR
dc.citation.startpage1ko_KR
dc.citation.volume23ko_KR
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share