BACKGROUND: Even though magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard investigation
for intracranial pathology, it is not widely available in developing countries and computed
tomography (CT) of the brain remains the first-line investigation for patients with suspected
intracranial pathology. It is generally accepted that certain intracranial pathology can be
missed on non-contrast-enhanced CT (NECT) of the brain if a contrast-enhanced CT (CECT)
is not done. We have to consider on the one hand the risk of delayed or missed diagnosis
and on the other hand the cost, increased radiation exposure and contrast-induced reactions.
Advances in CT technology have also improved the resolution of CT scan images, making it
easier to identify pathology on an NECT of the brain. To date, no study comparing NECT to
CECT of the brain, utilising 64-slice CT technology, has been published.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of undiagnosed abnormalities on non-contrastenhanced
computed tomography (NECT) scans of the brain reported as normal, on a 64-slice
METHOD: A descriptive retrospective study was undertaken of CT brain scans done during a
12-month period at a tertiary provincial hospital in the Northern Tshwane district of Gauteng,
South Africa. The CT brain scans were evaluated by three reviewers (general radiologists). The
NECT and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) scans of the brain were reviewed
independently on separate occasions. Reviewers were blinded to patient history, each other’s
interpretation, and to their own interpretation of the NECT when evaluating the CECT
and vice versa. Discrepancies in interpretation were resolved during a consensus meeting
between all three reviewers. The reviewers also re-evaluated the NECT scans of the cases with undiagnosed abnormal findings during this session. A decision was made pertaining to the
visibility of the abnormal findings on the NECT scan.
RESULTS: In this study, 3.28% of cases had abnormal findings undiagnosed by three reviewers
on the NECT scans. Re-evaluation by the panel reduced this to 1.42%, indicating a reading
error of 1.85%.
CONCLUSION: There is a small prevalence of missed abnormal findings on the NECT scan when
using only NECT. Omitting unnecessary CECT will reduce the radiation exposure to the
patient and reduce the risk of adverse events from the use of intravenous iodinated contrast.
Alternatively, doing only a CECT scan would reduce the risk of missing abnormal findings
and would also decrease the patient’s exposure to radiation.
Sathekge, Mike Machaba; Vorster, Mariza; Warwick, J.M.; Doruyter, A.(Health and Medical Publishing Group, 2015-11)
Individualised patient treatment approaches demand precise determination of initial disease extent combined with early, accurate
assessment of response to treatment, which is made possible by positron emission tomography/computed ...
Maes, Alex; Sathekge, Mike Machaba; Van de Wiele, Christophe; Hudyana, Hendrah; Vandenberghe, Thierry; Fidlers, Luc; Nicolai, Daniel(Springer, 2016-02)
BACKGROUND : The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate
the accuracy of bone SPECT (single photon emission computed
tomography)/CT (computed tomography) in diagnosing
loosening of fixation material in patients ...