Abstract:<h3 class="a-plus-plus">Abstract</h3> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec1"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Purpose</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">There is controversy regarding the administration of oral and rectal contrast for CT performed to detect bowel injury in the context of penetrating torso trauma. Given the lack of published societal guidelines, our goal was to survey radiologists from the American Society of Emergency Radiology membership database to determine consensus on CT protocols for penetrating trauma.</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec2"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Methods</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">With ethics board approval, an anonymous ten-question online survey was distributed via email to 589 radiologists in the American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER) member database. The survey was open for a 4-week period in February 2018. A commercially available website that allows subscribers to create and analyze survey results was used for analysis.</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec3"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Results</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">We received 124 responses (21% response rate) with a majority from U.S. institutions (82%). Seventy-four percent of respondents indicated they do not routinely administer oral contrast in penetrating trauma, 68% do not administer rectal contrast, and 90% do not use commercially available software to assess penetrating injury trajectory. Results from U.S. and non-U.S. practices were comparable. The decision to administer intraluminal contrast is made by the referring physician at 52% of institutions. There is in-house attending level radiology coverage at 54% of institutions and when asked if trauma scans are reviewed before removing the patient from the table, 41% of respondents answered “No.”</p> </span> <span class="a-plus-plus abstract-section id-a-sec4"> <h3 class="a-plus-plus">Conclusion</h3> <p class="a-plus-plus">Enteric contrast is used in a minority of respondents’ centers for penetrating trauma cases, which is likely driven by a perceived lack of added benefit and delays in patient care.</p> </span>

Gastrointestinal pharmacoradiology, an updated review of medications and gastrointestinal contrasts in abdominal imaging

Contraindications and Adverse Effects in Abdominal Imaging

Oral CT Contrast Agents: What's New and Why, From the AJR Special Series on Contrast Media

Up-to-date overview of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel diseases

[Complications due to contrast agent administration: what has been confirmed in prevention?]

Safe Use of Contrast Media: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

State of the Art MR Enterography Technique

Comprehensive literature review of oral and intravenous contrast-enhanced PET/CT: a step forward?

Gastrointestinal devices: common and uncommon foreign bodies

An international survey to assess use of oral and rectal contrast in CT protocols for penetrating torso trauma

The effect of the size of gold nanoparticle contrast agents on CT imaging of the gastrointestinal tract and inflammatory bowel disease

Use of carbon dioxide as an intravascular contrast agent: A review of current literature

Adverse Reactions to Contrast Material: A Canadian Update

Intravenous Imaging Contrast Media Complications: The Basics That Every Clinician Needs to Know

Iodinated Contrast Media and Their Adverse Reactions

The use of iohexol as oral contrast for computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis

Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Enterography: From Protocols to Diagnosis

Iodinated radiographic contrast media: comparison of low-osmolar with conventional ionic agents [corrected]

Contrast Media in Pregnant and Lactating Patients, From the AJR Special Series on Contrast Media

Where We Were and Where We Are

Bildgebende Diagnostik des Darms - eine Neubewertung, Teil 1