Comparison of low dose and standard dose abdominal CT scan in body stuffers

Abstract

Purpose: Detection of body stuffers is challenging in emergency departments. Because of the small size of baggies, plain radiograph is of little value in most suspects. On the other hand, abdomen CT scan is burdened by high cost and radiation dose. This study was performed to compare the image quality, radiation dose and accuracy of low-dose CT scan in comparison with standard dose.

Material and methods: In this prospective study, suspected body stuffers who were referred to the radiology department underwent two different protocols of abdominal non-contrast CT scan simultaneously: low-dose (with equivalent dose to conventional abdominal x-ray) and standard dose. Standard dose CT scan was considered as the reference. Low-dose CT scans were evaluated for detection of baggies by two radiologists blinded to the result of standard dose CT. Image quality, noise, dose-length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED) compared between two groups.

Results: The study consisted of 40 patients (33.38 ± 7.4 years). Standard dose CT evaluation was positive in 22 patients (55%). In comparison with standard dose CT scan, low-dose group had a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 100%, PPV and NPV of 100% and 86%. The accuracy of low-dose CT scan for detection of baggies larger than 1 cm was 100%. However, from the 3 cases that could not be detected with low dose protocol, one had CT features suspected for baggies rupture which was intubated and later deceased. Noise average of low-dose protocol, was approximately 7 times greater than standard dose group, while DLP and ED were 9.7 times less.

Conclusion: Low dose CT scan appears to be an appropriate screening method for body stuffers, especially when the baggies are larger than one centimeter. However, in the presence of severe clinical symptoms, a standard dose CT scan will be more helpful due to better image quality especially in suspected ruptured baggies.

Keywords:

• Mini packers
• pellets
• abuse
• radiation

Acknowledgement

This article has been extracted from the thesis written by Dr Zahra Mahboubi-Fooladi in School of Medicine Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (Registration No: 386M).

Disclosure statement

All the authors declare that he/she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Regulatory and ethical approvals were obtained and all prospectively recruited patients gave informed written consent.

Human and animal rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.