Abstract
Background
Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ce-VUS) is commonly requested simultaneously to other diagnostic imaging necessitating intravenous contrast agents. To date there is limited knowldedge about intravesical interactions between different types of contrast agents.
Objective
To assess the effect of excreted intravenous iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast agents on the intravesical distribution of ultrasound contrast within contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography.
Materials and methods
Iodinated (iomeprol, iopamidol) and gadolinium-based (gadoterate meglumine) contrast agents were diluted to bladder concentration and injected into balloons filled with saline solution. CT scans were performed to assess the contrast distribution in these phantoms. Regions of interest were placed at the top and bottom side of each balloon and Hounsfield units (HU) were measured. Three other balloons were filled with saline solution and contrast media likewise. The ultrasound contrast agent sulphur hexafluoride was added and its distribution was assessed using sonography.
Results
MDCT scans showed a separation of two liquid layers in all bladder phantoms with the contrast layers located at the bottom and the saline solution at the top. Significant differences of the HU measurements at the top and bottom side were observed (P < 0.001–0.007). Following injection of ultrasound contrast agent, US showed its distribution exclusively among the saline solution.
Conclusions
False-negative results of contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography may occur if it is performed shortly after imaging procedures requiring intravenous contrast.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Darge K, Papadopoulou F, Ntoulia A et al (2013) Safety of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in children for non-cardiac applications: a review by the Society for Pediatric Radiology (SPR) and the International Contrast Ultrasound Society (ICUS). Pediatr Radiol 43:1063–1073
Adeb M, Darge K (2013) Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography–a feasible modality for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux in a developing country. Ethiop Med J 51:153–160
Duran C, del Riego J, Riera L et al (2012) Voiding urosonography including urethrosonography: high-quality examinations with an optimised procedure using a second-generation US contrast agent. Pediatr Radiol 42:660–667
Riccabona M (2012) Application of a second-generation US contrast agent in infants and children–a European questionnaire-based survey. Pediatr Radiol 42:1471–1480
Darge K, Troeger J, Duetting T et al (1999) Reflux in young patients: comparison of voiding US of the bladder and retrovesical space with echo enhancement versus voiding cystourethrography for diagnosis. Radiology 210:201–207
Darge K, Higgins M, Hwang TJ et al (2013) Magnetic resonance and computed tomography in pediatric urology: an imaging overview for current and future daily practice. Radiol Clin North Am 51:583–598
Darge K (2008) Voiding urosonography with US contrast agents for the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux in children. II. Comparison with radiological examinations. Pediatr Radiol 38:54–63, quiz 126–127
Jost G, Lengsfeld P, Lenhard DC et al (2011) Viscosity of iodinated contrast agents during renal excretion. Eur J Radiol 80:373–377
Memarsadeghi M, Riccabona M, Heinz-Peer G (2005) MR urography: principles, examination techniques, indications. Radiologe 45:915–923
Seeliger E, Becker K, Ladwig M et al (2010) Up to 50-fold increase in urine viscosity with iso-osmolar contrast media in the rat. Radiology 256:406–414
International Reflux Study Committee (1981) Medical versus surgical treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux: report of the International Reflux Study Committee. Pediatrics 67:392–400
Heikel PE, Parkkulainen KV (1966) Vesico-ureteric reflux in children. A classification and results of conservative treatment. Ann Radiol (Paris) 9:37–40
Papadopoulou F, Anthopoulou A, Siomou E et al (2009) Harmonic voiding urosonography with a second-generation contrast agent for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux. Pediatr Radiol 39:239–244
Rosati G (1994) Clinical pharmacology of iomeprol. Eur J Radiol 18:51–60
Aime S, Caravan P (2009) Biodistribution of gadolinium-based contrast agents, including gadolinium deposition. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:1259–1267
Weishaupt D, Köchli VD, Marincek B (2009) Wie funktioniert MRI? Springer Publishing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all radiology technicians of the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology of the University Hospital Würzburg. Special thanks to Inge Krafft and Ulrike Pytlik for their help with the phantom scans.
Conflicts of interest
None
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Veldhoen, S., Sauer, A., Gassenmaier, T. et al. Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography phantom study: intravenous iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast agents may cause false-negative results in assessment of vesicoureteral reflux in children. Pediatr Radiol 45, 862–871 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3243-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3243-2