MDCT angiography of acute chest pain: evaluation of ECG-gated and nongated techniques.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare MDCT angiography protocols used in patients with acute chest pain caused by vascular, nonvascular, and cardiac abnormalities.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In four groups of 20 patients with chest pain each, four MDCT protocols were used based on monitoring vascular attenuation: pulmonary embolism (150 H at pulmonary artery), aortic dissection (200 H at aortic arch), chest pain (200 H at pulmonary artery), and chest pain with ECG gating (150 H at pulmonary artery). Vascular enhancement was assessed by attenuation measurements taken from locations in the pulmonary artery (n = 3) and thoracic aorta (n = 4). The appearance of the coronary artery in regard to opacification and motion was assessed on a scale of 1 to 5 (best).

RESULTS: The mean pulmonary artery and aorta attenuation (372 H and 352 H, respectively) was significantly higher (p < 0.005, Student's t test) and the number of vessel attenuation points measuring less than 200 H (1/140) was significantly smaller (p < 0.001, chi-square test) in the chest pain compared with the dissection (318 H, 310 H; 16/140), gated chest pain (304 H, 286 H; 17/14), and pulmonary embolism (302 H, 220 H; 28/140) groups. The median coronary artery visualization score was 4; the proximal regions received a significantly (p < 0.005, Mann-Whitney test) higher grade compared with the middle and distal regions (medians, 5, 4, and 2, respectively). Artifacts were noted on the gated scans.

CONCLUSION: The chest pain protocol can be used to assess both the pulmonary arteries and the thoracic aorta, whereas the ECG-gating protocol appears to be a promising adjunct for a comprehensive single chest pain protocol.