Streak artefacts in Computed Tomography Urography: Comparative evaluation between two different iodinated contrast media

Introduction The objective of this study was to compare the frequency and entity, in computed tomography (CT) urography, of streak artefacts on the urinary tract generated by two contrast agents with a different iodine concentration and osmolarity. Methods Computed tomography scans including an excretory renal phase, performed on adult subjects in the period May-July 2020, were retrospectively evaluated in consensus by three expert radiologists, to detect any streak artefacts located in the urinary tract. Patients were administered either 1.6 mL/kg of Iodixanol 320 mgI/mL or 1.3 mL/kg of Iomeprol 400 mgI/mL. Results In total, 144 CT scans were analysed, subdivided into two groups administered either Iodixanol (71/144 (49.3%) patients) or Iomeprol (73/144 (50.7%) patients). In 41% cases, no beam hardening artefacts were found; among these, 12/59 (20.3%) patients had received Iodixanol and 47/59 (79.7%) Iomeprol. In the Iodixanol group, the mean contrast density on the renal pelvis was 2565.6 HU and streak artefacts occurred in 59/71 cases (83.1%); in 33/59 (55.9%) cases, the artefacts were marked, and in 26/59 (44.1%) minimal. In the Iomeprol group, the mean contrast density on the renal pelvis was 1666 HU and streak artefacts occurred in 26/73 cases (35.6%); in 7/26 (27%) cases, the artefacts were marked and in 19/26 (73%) minimal. Conclusion The study data demonstrate a significant difference in the attenuation values of iodine urine in the excretory system between the Iodixanol and Iomeprol group. Iodixanol induced a higher frequency and burden of artefacts, compared to Iomeprol.