ObjectivesUsing smaller volumes of contrast media (CM) in CT angiography (CTA) is desirable in terms of cost reduction and prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). The purpose was to evaluate the feasibility of low CM volume in CTA of the aorta.Methods77 patients referred for CTA of the aorta were scanned using a standard MDCT protocol at 100 kV. A bolus of 50 ml CM (Iopromide 300 mg Iodine/ml) at a flow rate of 6 ml/s was applied (Iodine delivery rate IDR = 1.8 g/s; Iodine load 15 g) followed by a saline bolus of 40 ml at the same flow rate. Scan delay was determined by the test bolus method. Subjective image quality was assessed and contrast enhancement was measured at 10 anatomical levels of the aorta.ResultsDiagnostic quality images were obtained for all patients, reaching a mean overall contrast enhancement of 324 ± 28 HU. Mean attenuation was 350 ± 60 HU at the thoracic aorta and 315 ± 83 HU at the abdominal aorta.ConclusionsA straightforward low volume CM protocol proved to be technically feasible and led to CTA examinations reaching diagnostic image quality of the aorta at 100 kV. Based on these findings, the use of a relatively small CM bolus can be incorporated into routine clinical imaging.

Background Decision making in cancer treatment is influenced by standardized RECIST measurements which are subjective to interobserver variability. Aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether it is feasible to transfer the radiologist’s task of RECIST measurements to a trained radiology physician assistant and whether this influences diagnostic performance. Methods 177 lesions in twenty patients were measured on baseline and two follow-up CTs using RECIST 1.1: Arm A according to routine clinical practice where various radiologists read scans of the referred patients. Arm B according to the experimental setting where a radiology physician assistant performed RECIST measurements of target lesions defined by the radiologists on baseline scans. Performance and agreement were compared between groups. Results Standard deviation between lesion measurements of arm A and B was four millimeters. Interobserver agreement comparing response category classification was substantial, ĸ = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.66 - 0.87). Sensitivity and specificity for the radiology physician assistant for assessing progressive disease were 100% (95% CI: 61% - 100%) and 94% (95% CI: 81% - 98%) respectively. Conclusion RECIST measurements performed by a paramedic are a feasible alternative to standard practice. This could impact the workflow of radiological units, opening ways to re-assigning radiologists’ important, standardized but time consuming tasks to paramedics.