Case Control Study
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Radiol. Dec 28, 2014; 6(12): 907-912
Published online Dec 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i12.907
Improvement of distension and mural visualization of bowel loops using neutral oral contrasts in abdominal computed tomography
Jahanbakhsh Hashemi, Yasmin Davoudi, Mina Taghavi, Masoud Pezeshki Rad, Amien Mahajeri Moghadam
Jahanbakhsh Hashemi, Yasmin Davoudi, Masoud Pezeshki Rad, Radiology Department, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad 91788, Khorasane Razavi, Iran
Mina Taghavi, Amien Mahajeri Moghadam, Resident of Radiology Mashhad Medical School, Mashhad 91788, Khorasane Razavi, Iran
Author contributions: Hashemi J and Davoudi Y contributed equally in this research; Hashemi J, Davoudi Y and Taghavi M designed the research; Hashemi J, Pezeshki Rad M and Moghadam AM gathered data and performed the research; Davoudi Y, Taghavi M and Moghadam AM contributed analytic tools and analyzed the data; Hashemi J and Davoudi Y wrote the article.
Correspondence to: Yasmin Davoudi, MD, Assistant Professor, Radiology Department, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, P.O. Box 91375-3316, Mashhad 91788, Khorasane Razavi, Iran. davoudiy@mums.ac.ir
Telephone: +98-91-53145523 Fax: +98-51-38525004
Received: August 17, 2014
Revised: October 7, 2014
Accepted: November 7, 2014
Published online: December 28, 2014
Processing time: 67 Days and 19.4 Hours
Abstract

AIM: To assess and compare the image quality of 4% sorbitol and diluted iodine 2% (positive oral contrast agent) in abdomino-pelvic multi-detector computed tomography.

METHODS: Two-hundred patients, referred to the Radiology Department of a central educational hospital for multi-detector row abdominal-pelvic computed tomography, were randomly divided into two groups: the first group received 1500 mL of 4% sorbitol solution as a neutral contrast agent, while in the second group 1500 mL of meglumin solution as a positive contrast agent was administered in a one-way randomized prospective study. The results were independently reviewed by two radiologists. Luminal distension and mural thickness and mucosal enhancement were compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis of the results was performed by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software version 16 and the Mann-Whitney test at a confidence level of 95%.

RESULTS: Use of neutral oral contrast agent significantly improved visualization of the small bowel wall thickness and mural appearance in comparison with administration of positive contrast agent (P < 0.01). In patients who received sorbitol, the small bowel showed better distention compared with those who received iodine solution as a positive contrast agent (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: The results of the study demonstrated that oral administration of sorbitol solution allows better luminal distention and visualization of mural features than iodine solution as a positive contrast agent.

Keywords: Multidetector row computed tomography scan; Neutral contrast agent; Positive contrast agent

Core tip: In this study, performed on 200 cases, we randomly divided the cases into two groups receiving either meglumin as a positive contrast or sorbitol as a negative contrast for abdominal and pelvic computed tomography. Our study showed that luminal distension and mural thickness was significantly better delineated with neutral contrast agent compared with positive contrast solution.