Skip to main content
Log in

Imaging of the liver: a survey update of prevailing techniques for conventional CT scanning

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

A survey of the Society of Computed Body Tomography/Magnetic Resonance (SCBT/MR) was performed to assess current techniques in liver CT scanning.

Methods

The study was designed as an update to a study performed in 1987. The survey was distributed to 67 members of the SCBT/MR at 35 institutions.

Results

Twenty-six institutions responded. As in 1987, none relied solely on noncontrast scans. In 1987, only 54% (12/22) of institutions performed contrast-enhanced scans as their primary technique compared with 73% (19/26) in 1993. Ionic contrast was used exclusively in the earlier study, whereas in the present study 58% used nonionic contrast in the majority of cases and 38% used nonionic contrast routinely. In 1987, 41% performed scans with a power injector compared with 85% in the present study. Enhanced scans were performed during the contrast bolus in 36% of institutions in 1987 compared with 76% in this study. No institution relied on noncontrast scans alone. In the previous study the delay between injection and scanning was variable (0–60 s), whereas in the present study 83% specified a delay of 21–45s.

Conclusion

Significant refinements in CT technique, wider use of power injectors, utilization of nonionic contrast, and a more critical approach to optimize liver imaging have created a significant impact on the practice of liver CT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Young SW, Turner RJ, Castellino RA. A strategy for the contrast enhancement of malignant tumors using dynamic computed tomography and intravascular pharmacokinetics. Radiology 1980 137:137–147

    Google Scholar 

  2. Foley WD, Berland LL, Lawson TL, Smith DF, Thorsen MK. Contrast enhancement technique for dynamic hepatic computed tomographic scanning. Radiology 1983;147:797–803

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berland LL, Lawson TL, Foley WD, Belrose BL, Chintapalli KN, Taylor AJ. Comparison of preand post-contrast CT in hepatic masses. AJR 1982;138:853–858

    Google Scholar 

  4. Freeny PC, Marks WM. Patterns of contrast enhancement of benign and malignant hepatic neoplasms during bolus dynamic and delayed CT. Radiology 1986;160:613–618

    Google Scholar 

  5. Paushter DM, Zeman RK, Schiebler ML, Choyke PL, Jaffe MH, Clark LR. Comparison of intravenous contrast enhancement techniques in the CT evaluation of hepatic metastases [Abstract 278] Radiology 1985;157(P):115

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zeman RK, Clements LA, Silverman PM, et al. CT of the liver: a survey of prevailing methods of administration of contrast. AJR 1988;150:107–109

    Google Scholar 

  7. Foley WD. Dynamic CT scanning. AJR 1989;152:272–274

    Google Scholar 

  8. Foley WD. Dynamic hepatic CT. Radiology 1989;170:617–622

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cohan RH, Dunnick NR, et al. Extravasation of nonionic radiologic contrast media: efficacy of conservative treatment. Radiology 1990;176:65–67

    Google Scholar 

  10. Jones EC, Chezmar JL, Nelson RC, Bernardino ME. Frequency and significance of small (≤15 mm) hepatic lesions detected by CT. AJR 1992;158:535–539

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Dr. Silverman is supported in part by a Senior Research and Development Award from General Electric Medical Systems. Additional grant support provided by NY COMED Inc., Mallinckrodt Medical and Medrad Inc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silverman, P.M., Cooper, C. & Zeman, R.K. Imaging of the liver: a survey update of prevailing techniques for conventional CT scanning. Abdom Imaging 20, 348–352 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00203369

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00203369

Key words

Navigation