Clinical Imaging
Volume 34, Issue 4 , Pages 263-268 , July 2010

CT-guided liver biopsy: correlation of procedure time and radiation dose with patient size, weight, and lesion volume and depth

Received 28 March 2009 ,Accepted 20 June 2009.

References 

  1. Caturelli E, Ghittoni G, Roselli P, De Palo M, Anti M. Fine needle biopsy of focal liver lesions: the hepatologist's point of view. Liver Transpl. 2004;10:S26–S29
  2. Crowe DR, Eloubeidi MA, Chhieng DC, Jhala NC, Jhala D, Eltoum IA. Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of hepatic lesions: computerized tomographic-guided versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA. Cancer. 2006;108:180–185
  3. Stattaus J, Kuhl H, Hauth EA, Kalkmann J, Baba HA, Forsting M. Liver biopsy under guidance of multislice computed tomography: comparison of 16G and 18G biopsy needles. Radiologie. 2007;47:430–438
  4. Thanos L, Zormpala A, Papaioannou G, Malagari K, Brountzos E, Kelekis D. Safety and efficacy of percutaneous CT-guided liver biopsy using an 18-gauge automated needle. Eur J Intern Med. 2005;16:571–574
  5. Aldrich JE, Chang SD, Bilawich AM, Mayo JR. Radiation dose in abdominal computed tomography: the role of patient size and the selection of tube current. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2006;57:152–158
  6. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Kamath RS, et al. Sixteen-detector row CT of abdomen and pelvis: study for optimization of Z-axis modulation technique performed in 153 patients. Radiology. 2004;233:241–249
  7. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, et al. Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology. 2005;237:945–951
  8. Funama Y, Awai K, Nakayama Y, et al. Radiation dose reduction without degradation of low-contrast detectability at abdominal multisection CT with a low-tube voltage technique: phantom study. Radiology. 2005;237:905–910
  9. Haaga JR. Radiation dose management: weighing risk versus benefit. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:289–291
  10. Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G. Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology. 2000;217:430–435
  11. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Prasad SR, et al. Correlation of patient weight and cross-sectional dimensions with subjective image quality at standard dose abdominal CT. Kor J Radiol. 2003;4:234–238
  12. Aldrich JE, Bilawich AM, Mayo JR. Radiation doses to patients receiving computed tomography examinations in British Columbia. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2006;57:79–85
  13. Chojniak R, Isberner RK, Viana LM, Yu LS, Aita AA, Soares FA. Computed tomography guided needle biopsy: experience from 1,300 procedures. Sao Paulo Med J. 2006;124:10–14
  14. Stattaus J, Kuehl H, Ladd S, et al. CT-guided biopsy of small liver lesions: visibility, artifacts, and corresponding diagnostic accuracy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30(5):928–935
  15. Tsalafoutas IA, Tsapaki V, Triantopoulou C, Gorantonaki A, Papailiou J. CT-guided interventional procedures without CT fluoroscopy assistance: patient effective dose and absorbed dose considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:1479–1484
  16. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology. 2004;230:619–628
  17. Kalra MK, Prasad S, Saini S, et al. Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:1101–1106
  18. Kopp AF, Heuschmid M, Claussen CD. Multidetector helical CT of the liver for tumor detection and characterization. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:745–752
  19. Starck G, Lonn L, Cederblad A, Forssell-Aronsson E, Sjostrom L, Alpsten M. A method to obtain the same levels of CT image noise for patients of various sizes, to minimize radiation dose. Br J Radiol. 2002;75:140–150
  20. Neeman Z, Dromi SA, Sarin S, Wood BJ. CT fluoroscopy shielding: decreases in scattered radiation for the patient and operator. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:1999–2004
  21. Silverman SG, Tuncali K, Adams DF, Nawfel RD, Zou KH, Judy PF. CT fluoroscopy-guided abdominal interventions: techniques, results, and radiation exposure. Radiology. 1999;212:673–681

☆ No financial disclosure.

PII: S0899-7071(09)00175-2

doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2009.06.029

Clinical Imaging
Volume 34, Issue 4 , Pages 263-268 , July 2010

Article Tools