Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ International Journa...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
International Journal of Advanced Research
Article . 2022 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2022
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2022
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article . 2022
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

A STUDY OF URINARY TRACT ABNORMALITIES: ROLE OF LOW DOSE MDCT UROGRAPHY

Authors: Gupta, Shruti; Kushal Gehlot; N.K. Kardam; Sharma, Manoj;

A STUDY OF URINARY TRACT ABNORMALITIES: ROLE OF LOW DOSE MDCT UROGRAPHY

Abstract

Introduction: Computed Tomography (CT) urography is more accurate in detection of renal masses, urinary tract tumors, inflammatory lesion, calculi and other causes of urinary tract obstruction compared with intravenous urography. The standard single bolus MDCT Urography protocol comprises three to four phases, consists of non-contrast, corticomedullary, nephrographic and excretory phases. A major disadvantage is a high radiation dose, which is 8-10 times higher than an IVP examination. In comparison, an split-bolus, dual-phase technique scans the urinary system in the non-contrast and combined nephrographic-excretory phases. This study aimed to compare the total CT radiation dose of patient and image quality in standard MDCTU protocol and low dose MDCTU protocol. Methodology: In this hospital based prospective study total 100 patients (50 tests and 50 controls) were compared for radiation dose and subjective image quality assessment between standard dose MDCTU protocol [non contrast scan at 120kvp , followed by contrast enhanced corticomedullary phase and excretory phase] and low dose MDCTU protocol (non contrast scan (at 80 kvp), followed by contrast enhanced synchronus corticomedullary phase and excretory phase acquisition by using split bolus contrast administration technique) . Result: In the standard dose MDCTU protocol in unenhanced and enhanced phase, patients received mean net effective dose of 18.83 mSv and in the low dose protocol, patients received mean net effective dose of 9.06 mSv with significant 52% dose reduction (P value <0.001). In Standard dose protocol in unenhanced phase, optimal resolution in 82% patients, moderately grainy/poor resolution in 14% and significantly grainy/very poor resolution in 4% patients. In low dose protocol, optimal resolution in 64% patients, mild to moderately grainy/poor resolution in 22% and significantly grainy/very poor resolution in 14% patients with no significant difference in image quality in both protocol (P value>0.05). In low dose protocol, mild to moderately grainy/poor resolution images (22%) of unenhanced phase reviewed together with normal dose good qualitysynchronus corticomedullary and excretory phase images to diagnosis the almost same spectrum of pathology like standard dose protocol. Conclusion: In low dose MDCT Urography radiation dose reduction of approx 50% is possible with no significant difference in image quality in line to ALARA principle (As low as reasonably achievable), facilitating diagnosis of urological pathologies.

Related Organizations
Keywords

MDCTU Low Dose Standard Dose Protocol Radiation Dose Image Quality

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 2
    download downloads 7
  • 2
    views
    7
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
2
7
Green
gold