SpringerLink
Log in

The CT scout view: complementary value added to abdominal CT interpretation

  • Review
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) scout images, also known as CT localizer radiographs, topograms, or scanograms, are an important, albeit often overlooked part of the CT examination. Scout images may contain important findings outside of the scanned field of view on CT examinations of the abdomen and pelvis, such as unsuspected lung cancer at the lung bases. Alternatively, scout images can provide complementary information to findings within the scanned field of view, such as characterization of retained surgical foreign bodies. Assessment of scout images adds value and provides a complementary “opportunistic” review for interpretation of abdominopelvic CT examinations. Scout image review is a useful modern application of conventional abdominal radiograph interpretation that can help establish a diagnosis or narrow a differential diagnosis. This review discusses the primary purpose and intent of the CT scout images, addresses standard of care and bias related to scout image review, and presents a general systematic approach to assessing scout images with multiple illustrative examples, including potential pitfalls in interpreting scout images.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Johnson PT, Scott WW, Gayler BW, Lewin JS, Fishman EK. The CT scout view: does it need to be routinely reviewed as part of the CT interpretation? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202:1256-1263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Emamian SA, Dubovsky EC, Vezina LG, Carter W, Bulas DI. CT scout films: don't forget to look! Pediatr Radiol 2003; 33:535-539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brook OR, Guralnik L, Engel A. CT scout view as an essential part of CT reading. Australas Radiol 2007; 51:211-217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AAPM CT Lexicon version 1.3. 2012;

  5. Szczykutowicz T. The CT handbook : optimizing protocols for today's feature-rich scanners, 2020

  6. American College of Radiology. ACR–SCBT-MR–SPR–STR PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THORACIC COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY (CT). In, 2018

  7. Daffner RH. Reviewing CT Scout Images: Observations of an Expert Witness. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205:589-591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Berlin L. Reviewing the CT scout view: medicolegal and ethical considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202:1264-1266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Berlin L. Medicolegal--malpractice and ethical issues in radiology. CT scout views and standard of care. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203:W741

  10. Busby LP, Courtier JL, Glastonbury CM. Bias in Radiology: The How and Why of Misses and Misinterpretations. Radiographics 2018; 38:236-247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Itri JN, Patel SH. Heuristics and Cognitive Error in Medical Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210:1097-1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nazir SA, Benamore R, Gleeson F. Missed lung cancers on the scout view: do we look every time? Case Rep Med 2013; 2013:760543

  13. Gayer G, Petrovitch I, Jeffrey RB. Foreign objects encountered in the abdominal cavity at CT. Radiographics 2011; 31:409-428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gayer G, Lubner MG, Bhalla S, Pickhardt PJ. Imaging of abdominal and pelvic surgical and postprocedural foreign bodies. Radiol Clin North Am 2014; 52:991-1027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gawande AA, Studdert DM, Orav EJ, Brennan TA, Zinner MJ. Risk factors for retained instruments and sponges after surgery. N Engl J Med 2003; 348:229-235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Apter S, Hertz M, Rubinstein ZJ, Zissin R. Gossypiboma in the early post-operative period: a diagnostic problem. Clin Radiol 1990; 42:128-129

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hara AK, Leighton JA, Sharma VK, Fleischer DE. Small bowel: preliminary comparison of capsule endoscopy with barium study and CT. Radiology 2004; 230:260-265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hara AK, Leighton JA, Sharma VK, Heigh RI, Fleischer DE. Imaging of small bowel disease: comparison of capsule endoscopy, standard endoscopy, barium examination, and CT. Radiographics 2005; 25:697–711; discussion 711–698

  19. Pickhardt PJ. Screening CT colonography: How I do it. American Journal of Roentgenology 2007; 189:290-298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ahn SH, Mayo-Smith WW, Murphy BL, Reinert SE, Cronan JJ. Acute nontraumatic abdominal pain in adult patients: abdominal radiography compared with CT evaluation. Radiology 2002; 225:159-164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Musson RE, Bickle I, Vijay RK. Gas patterns on plain abdominal radiographs: a pictorial review. Postgrad Med J 2011; 87:274-287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Menuck L, Siemers PT. Pneumoperitoneum: importance of right upper quadrant features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1976; 127:753-756

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Levine MS, Scheiner JD, Rubesin SE, Laufer I, Herlinger H. Diagnosis of pneumoperitoneum on supine abdominal radiographs. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 156:731-735

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Seibert JJ, Parvey LS. The telltale triangle: use of the supine cross table lateral radiograph of the abdomen in early detection of pneumoperitoneum. Pediatr Radiol 1977; 5:209-210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Galandiuk S, Fazio VW. Pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis. A review of the literature. Dis Colon Rectum 1986; 29:358–363

  26. Ho LM, Paulson EK, Thompson WM. Pneumatosis intestinalis in the adult: benign to life-threatening causes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:1604-1613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pear BL. Pneumatosis intestinalis: a review. Radiology 1998; 207:13-19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Markus JB, Somers S, Franic SE, Moola C, Stevenson GW. Interobserver variation in the interpretation of abdominal radiographs. Radiology 1989; 171:69-71

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Paulson EK, Thompson WM. Review of small-bowel obstruction: the diagnosis and when to worry. Radiology 2015; 275:332-342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Balthazar EJ, Birnbaum BA, Megibow AJ, Gordon RB, Whelan CA, Hulnick DH. Closed-loop and strangulating intestinal obstruction: CT signs. Radiology 1992; 185:769-775

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jaffe T, Thompson WM. Large-Bowel Obstruction in the Adult: Classic Radiographic and CT Findings, Etiology, and Mimics. Radiology 2015; 275:651-663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Levsky JM, Den EI, DuBrow RA, Wolf EL, Rozenblit AM. CT findings of sigmoid volvulus. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194:136-143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Javors BR, Baker SR, Miller JA. The northern exposure sign: a newly described finding in sigmoid volvulus. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999; 173:571-574

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Burrell HC, Baker DM, Wardrop P, Evans AJ. Significant plain film findings in sigmoid volvulus. Clin Radiol 1994; 49:317-319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zeina AR, Nachtigal A, Matter I, et al. Giant colon diverticulum: clinical and imaging findings in 17 patients with emphasis on CT criteria. Clin Imaging 2013; 37:704-710

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zeina AR, Mahamid A, Nachtigal A, Ashkenazi I, Shapira-Rootman M. Giant colonic diverticulum: radiographic and MDCT characteristics. Insights Imaging 2015; 6:659-664

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Nigri G, Petrucciani N, Giannini G, et al. Giant colonic diverticulum: clinical presentation, diagnosis and treatment: systematic review of 166 cases. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21:360-368

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Zulfiqar M, Shetty A, Tsai R, Gagnon MH, Balfe DM, Mellnick VM. Diagnostic Approach to Benign and Malignant Calcifications in the Abdomen and Pelvis. Radiographics 2020; 40:731-753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Pedrosa I, Saíz A, Arrazola J, Ferreirós J, Pedrosa CS. Hydatid disease: radiologic and pathologic features and complications. Radiographics 2000; 20:795-817

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Beggs I. The radiology of hydatid disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 145:639-648

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lewall DB. Hydatid disease: biology, pathology, imaging and classification. Clin Radiol 1998; 53:863-874

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pedrosa I, Saiz A, Arrazola J, Ferreiros J, Pedrosa CS. Hydatid disease: radiologic and pathologic features and complications. Radiographics 2000; 20:795-817

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cheng JM, Tirumani SH, Kim KW, Saboo SS, Baez JC, Shinagare AB. Malignant abdominal rocks: where do they come from? Cancer Imaging 2013; 13:527-539

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Agarwal A, Yeh BM, Breiman RS, Qayyum A, Coakley FV. Peritoneal calcification: causes and distinguishing features on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:441-445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Burkill GJ, Allen SD, A'hern RP, Gore ME, King DM. Significance of tumour calcification in ovarian carcinoma. Br J Radiol 2009; 82:640–644

  46. Ganeshan D, Bhosale P, Wei W, et al. Increase in post-therapy tumor calcification on CT scan is not an indicator of response to therapy in low-grade serous ovarian cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016; 41:1589-1595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Heron M. Deaths: Leading Causes for 2017. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2019; 68:1-77

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Banaste N, Caurier B, Bratan F, Bergerot JF, Thomson V, Millet I. Whole-Body CT in Patients with Multiple Traumas: Factors Leading to Missed Injury. Radiology 2018; 289:374-383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Novelline RA. CT in the Patient with Multiple Trauma: Risk Factors for Missed Findings. Radiology 2018; 289:384-385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Bazzocchi A, Fuzzi F, Garzillo G, et al. Reliability and accuracy of scout CT in the detection of vertebral fractures. Br J Radiol 2013; 86:20130373

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Loo JT, Duddalwar V, Chen FK, Tejura T, Lekht I, Gulati M. Abdominal radiograph pearls and pitfalls for the emergency department radiologist: a pictorial review. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:987-1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ballard DH, Mazaheri P, Oppenheimer DC, et al. Imaging of Abdominal Wall Masses, Masslike Lesions, and Diffuse Processes. Radiographics 2020; 40:684-706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Levenson RB, Singh AK, Novelline RA. Fournier gangrene: role of imaging. Radiographics 2008; 28:519-528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Jon Glazer, MD for his case contribution (giant sigmoid diverticulum).

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, USA

    Matthew H. Lee, Meghan G. Lubner & Perry J. Pickhardt

  2. Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, Campus, Box 8131, St. Louis, USA

    Vincent M. Mellnick & Sanjeev Bhalla

  3. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 13400 E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA

    Christine O. Menias

Authors
  1. Matthew H. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meghan G. Lubner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vincent M. Mellnick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christine O. Menias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sanjeev Bhalla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Perry J. Pickhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MHL is the primary author, designed the work, wrote the manuscript, formatted images, and performed final approval. MGL conceived and designed the work, contributed cases, and critically revised the manuscript. VMM contributed cases, assisted in design of the work, and critically revised the manuscript. COM contributed cases, assisted in design of the work, formatted images, and critically revised the manuscript. SB contributed cases, assisted in design of the work, and critically revised the manuscript. PJP conceived and designed the work, contributed cases, formatted images, critically revised the manuscript, and assisted in final approval.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew H. Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Matthew H. Lee is a military service member. This work was prepared as part of official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that ‘Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the USA Government.’ The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense or the USA Government. Meghan G. Lubner has received prior grant funding from Ethicon and Philips. Vincent M. Mellnick has nothing to disclose. Christine O. Menias receives book royalties from Elsevier. Sanjeev Bhalla has nothing to disclose. Perry J. Pickhardt is an advisor for Bracco and Zebra; and shareholder in SHINE, Elucent, and Cellectar.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, M.H., Lubner, M.G., Mellnick, V.M. et al. The CT scout view: complementary value added to abdominal CT interpretation. Abdom Radiol 46, 5021–5036 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03135-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03135-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation