<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/9137">
    <title>OAR@UM Collection:</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/9137</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/9138" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2026-04-27T06:03:16Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/9138">
    <title>Evaluating the use of oral contrast for abdominal CT</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/9138</link>
    <description>Title: Evaluating the use of oral contrast for abdominal CT
Abstract: Purpose: To evaluate the impact on diagnostic efficacy of the use of different types&#xD;
of oral contrast media. The objectives were to establish image quality criteria for&#xD;
bowel evaluation on abdominopelvic CT; use the newly established image quality&#xD;
criteria to evaluate and compare image quality in abdominopelvic CT examinations&#xD;
using positive OCM, neutral OCM, and no OCM; and evaluate possible benefits in&#xD;
terms of costs for the medical imaging department.&#xD;
Methodology: Forty-six adult outpatients attending for a follow-up abdominopelvic&#xD;
CT for general oncological indications and who had previously undergone an&#xD;
abdominopelvic CT for which positive OCM was administered were recruited to the&#xD;
study. The previous abdominopelvic CT images with positive OCM (n = 46) were&#xD;
collected retrospectively whilst follow-up exams for which either water (n = 25) or&#xD;
no OCM (n = 21) were administered were collected prospectively, totalling 92&#xD;
abdominopelvic image sets. Three observers performed absolute visual grading&#xD;
analysis to assess the image quality of the images according to 24 image quality&#xD;
criteria. Data was analysed using visual grading characteristics. Costs were&#xD;
computed by calculating the monetary expenditure related to OCM administration&#xD;
per patient. Other costs, such as time, were also noted.&#xD;
Results: The results of this study demonstrate that abdominopelvic CT using positive&#xD;
OCM, water as a neutral OCM, or no OCM results in comparable image quality with&#xD;
regards to reproduction of abdominal structures, discrimination of the bowel from&#xD;
these structures, presence of artefacts, and visualisation of the amount of intraabdominal&#xD;
fat for all OCM protocols. The cost of positive OCM was found to be&#xD;
approximately €1.70 per patient. The water cost was considered negligible.&#xD;
Conclusion: Positive OCM, water or no OCM can be used for follow-up staging&#xD;
abdominopelvic CT for general oncological indications.
Description: M.SC.RADIOGRAPHY</description>
    <dc:date>2013-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

