Automated contrast medium monitoring system for computed tomography – Intra-institutional audit

• We evaluated a RIS-PACS-connected system for contrast medium (CM) monitoring.
• CM injection parameters for 8609 CT studies were systematically retrieved.
• Data related to patient, CT study and technical issues were also recorded.
• The system has the potential to improve CT protocol optimization and harmonization.

The aim of this study was to analyze the usage and the data recorded by a RIS-PACS-connected contrast medium (CM) monitoring system (Certegra®, Bayer Healthcare, Leverkusen, Germany) over 19 months of CT activity. The system used was connected to two dual syringe power injectors (each associated with a 16-row and a high definition 64-row multidetector CT scanner, respectively), allowing to manage contrast medium injection parameters and to send and retrieve CT study-related information via RIS/PACS for any scheduled contrast-enhanced CT examination. The system can handle up to 64 variables and can be accessed via touchscreen by CT operators as well as via a web interface by registered users with three different hierarchy levels. Data related to CM injection parameters (i.e. iodine concentration, volume and flow rate of CM, iodine delivery rate and iodine dose, CM injection pressure, and volume and flow rate of saline), patient weight and height, and type of CT study over a testing period spanning from 1 June 2013 to 10 January 2015 were retrieved from the system. Technical alerts occurred for each injection event (such as system disarm due to technical failure, disarm due to operator's stop, incomplete filling of patient data fields, or excessively high injection pressure), as well as interoperability issues related to data sending and receiving to/from the RIS/PACS were also recorded. During the testing period, the CM monitoring system generated a total of 8609 reports, of which 7629 relative to successful injection events (88.6%). 331 alerts were generated, of which 40 resulted in injection interruption and 291 in CM flow rate limitation due to excessively high injection pressure (>325 psi). Average CM volume and flow rate were 93.73 ± 17.58 mL and 3.53 ± 0.89 mL/s, and contrast injection pressure ranged between 5 and 167 psi. A statistically significant correlation was found between iodine concentration and peak IDR (rs = 0.2744, p < 0.0001), as well as between iodine concentration and iodine dose (rs = 0.3862, p < 0.0001) for all CT studies. Automated contrast management systems can provide a full report of contrast use with the possibility to systematically compare different contrast injection protocols, minimize errors, and optimize organ-specific contrast enhancement for any given patient and clinical application. This can be useful to improve and harmonize the quality and consistency of contrast CT procedures within the same radiological department and across the hospital, as well as to monitor potential adverse events and overall costs.