JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Image quality and radiation exposure using different low-dose scan protocols in dual-source CT coronary angiography: randomized study

Lisan A Neefjes, Anoeshka S Dharampal, Alexia Rossi, Koen Nieman, Annick C Weustink, Marcel L Dijkshoorn, Gert-Jan R Ten Kate, Admir Dedic, Stella L Papadopoulou, Marcel van Straten, Filippo Cademartiri, Gabriël P Krestin, Pim J de Feyter, Nico R Mollet
Radiology 2011, 261 (3): 779-86
21969666

PURPOSE: To compare image quality, radiation dose, and their relationship with heart rate of computed tomographic (CT) coronary angiographic scan protocols by using a 128-section dual-source CT scanner.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approved the study; all patients gave informed consent. Two hundred seventy-two patients (175 men, 97 women; mean ages, 58 and 59 years, respectively) referred for CT coronary angiography were categorized according to heart rate: less than 65 beats per minute (group A) and 65 beats per minute or greater (group B). Patients were randomized to undergo prospective high-pitch spiral scanning and narrow-window prospective sequential scanning in group A (n = 160) or wide-window prospective sequential scanning and retrospective spiral scanning in group B (n = 112). Image quality was graded (1 = nondiagnostic; 2 = artifacts present, diagnostic; 3 = no artifacts) and compared (Mann-Whitney and Student t tests).

RESULTS: In group A, mean image quality grade was significantly lower with high-pitch spiral versus sequential scanning (2.67 ± 0.38 [standard deviation] vs 2.86 ± 0.21; P < .001). In a subpopulation (heart rate, <55 beats per minute), mean image quality grade was similar (2.81 ± 0.30 vs 2.94 ± 0.08; P = .35). In group B, image quality grade was comparable between sequential and retrospective spiral scanning (2.81 ± 0.28 vs 2.80 ± 0.38; P = .54). Mean estimated radiation dose was significantly lower (high-pitch spiral vs sequential scanning) in group A (for 100 kV, 0.81 mSv ± 0.30 vs 2.74 mSv ± 1.14 [P < .001]; for 120 kV, 1.65 mSv ± 0.69 vs 4.21 mSv ± 1.20 [P < .001]) and in group B (sequential vs retrospective spiral scanning) (for 100 kV, 4.07 mSv ± 1.07 vs 5.54 mSv ± 1.76 [P = .02]; for 120 kV, 7.50 mSv ± 1.79 vs 9.83 mSv ± 3.49 [P = .1]).

CONCLUSION: A high-pitch spiral CT coronary angiographic protocol should be applied in patients with regular and low (<55 beats per minute) heart rates; a sequential protocol is preferred in all others.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
21969666
×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"