Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Image Quality With High-concentration and Low-concentration Contrast Agents: The Randomized CONCENTRATE Trial.

PURPOSE: To confirm that the image quality of coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography with a low tube voltage (80 to 100 kVp), iterative reconstruction, and low-concentration contrast agents (iodixanol 270 to 320 mgI/mL) was not inferior to that with conventional high tube voltage (120 kVp) and high-concentration contrast agent (iopamidol 370 mgI/mL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled a total of 318 patients from 8 clinical sites. All patients were randomly assigned 1: 1: 1 for each contrast medium of 270, 320, and 370 mgI/mL. CT scans were taken with a standard protocol in the high-concentration group (370 mgI/mL) and with 20 kVp lower protocol in the low-concentration group (270 or 320 mgI/mL). Image quality and radiation dose were compared between the groups. Image quality was evaluated with a score of 1 to 4 as subject image quality.

RESULTS: The mean HU, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio of the 3 groups were significantly different (all P<0.0001). The signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio of the low-concentration groups were significantly lower than those of the high-concentration group (P<0.05). However, the image quality scores were not significantly different among the 3 groups (P=0.745). The dose length product and effective dose of the high-concentration group were significantly higher than those of the low-concentration group (P<0.0001 and 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: The CT protocol with iterative reconstruction and lower tube voltage for low-concentration contrast agents significantly reduced the effective radiation dose (mean: 3.7±2.7 to 4.1±3.1 mSv) while keeping the subjective image quality as good as the standard protocol (mean: 5.7±3.4 mSv).

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app