Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=900

Uniformity of Oral Contrast Material in the Bowel

Known or Suspected Abdominal Disease

Enrolled (actual)
900
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Nov 2019
Primary outcome: Primary: Number of Participants With Non-uniform Bowel Lumen Opacification at CT Imaging — 140; 73; 68 Participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Observational
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Barium (Drug); Diatrizoate (Drug); Iohexol (Drug)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
University of California, San Francisco
Primary completion
Jan 2017

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Number of Participants With Non-uniform Bowel Lumen Opacification at CT Imaging
140; 73; 68
PRIMARY
Severity of CT Imaging Artifacts Caused by the Oral Contrast Agent
296; 294; 296; 4; 6; 4
SECONDARY
Extent of Bowel Opacification of Bowel at CT Imaging
0; 0; 0; 2; 0; 0

Summary

Although positive oral contrast agents are used for the majority of abdominopelvic CT scans in the United States, the quality of bowel opacification has not been compared between the three major classes of positive oral contrast material (barium sulfate, ionic iodinated contrast material, and non-ionic iodinate contrast material). This is a retrospective single institution study of clinical records to show whether the uniformity of bowel opacification is different between the three main types of positive CT oral contrast material used in the United States (Barium sulfate, Diatrizoate, and Iohexol). The investigators will retrospectively identify 250 patients each who received oral barium sulfate, diatrizoate, and iohexol for CT scanning of the abdomen and pelvis (total 750 patients) and assess the quality of bowel lumen opacification by the positive oral contrast agents.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • CT scans in which oral contrast material was given

Exclusion Criteria

  • CT scans in which an obvious paucity of oral contrast material is seen,
  • CT scans of patients who had studies within 1 week prior where enteric contrast may have been given, including fluoroscopic, endoscopic, or interventional studies
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02542046). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search