First head-to-head comparison of effective radiation dose from low-dose 64-slice CT with prospective ECG-triggering versus invasive coronary angiography

Heart

Volumn 95, Issue 20, 2009, Pages 1656-1661

  Herzog, B A ^a   Wyss, C A ^a   Husmann, L ^a   Gaemperli, O ^a   Valenta, I ^a   Treyer, V ^a   Landmesser, U ^a   Kaufmann, Philipp A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCIUM; ISOSORBIDE DINITRATE; METOPROLOL TARTRATE;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INVASIVE PROCEDURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIATION DOSE; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGLE DRUG DOSE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY VESSELS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RADIATION DOSAGE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 70349611312     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2008.162420     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, et al. Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008;29:531-556 (Pubitemid 351264173)
2. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007;298:317-323 (Pubitemid 47080486)
3. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation; Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board DoEaLS, National Research Council of the National Academies. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2006.
4. Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114:1761-1791 (Pubitemid 44607126)
5. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 2004;232:735-738
6. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005;112:2318-2323 (Pubitemid 41464575)
7. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:147-154 (Pubitemid 40905143)
8. Stolzmann P, Scheffel H, Schertler T, et al. Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2008;18:592-599 (Pubitemid 351248188)
9. Hsieh J, Londt J, Vass M, et al. Step-and-shoot data acquisition and reconstruction for cardiac x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 2006;33:4236-4248 (Pubitemid 44673113)
10. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA, et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology 2008;246:742-753
11. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J 2008;29:191-197
12. Herzog BA, Husmann L, Burkhard N, et al. Accuracy of low-dose computed tomography coronary angiography using prospective electrocardiogram-triggering: first clinical experience. Eur Heart J 2008;29:3037-3042
13. Maruyama T, Takada M, Hasuike T, et al. Radiation dose reduction and coronary assessability of prospective electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography coronary angiography comparison with retrospective electrocardiogram-gated helical scan. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:1450-1455
14. United Nations. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes. New York: UN, 2000.
15. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Bricker JT, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1997 Exercise Testing Guidelines). Circulation 2002;106:1883-1892
16. Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology 2006;241:378-385 (Pubitemid 44632882)
17. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975;51:5-40.
18. Commission E. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography, EUR 16262EN. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000. Available at:http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/ quality/htmlindex. htm. (Accessed 21 November 2008.)
19. Lobotessi H, Karoussou A, Neofotistou V, et al. Effective dose to a patient undergoing coronary angiography. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2001;94:173-176 (Pubitemid 32433157)
20. Scanlon PJ, Faxon DP, Audet AM, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for coronary angiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on Coronary Angiography). Developed in collaboration with the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:1756-1824
21. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1482-1487 (Pubitemid 41378989)
22. Motoyama S, Anno H, Sarai M, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with a prototype 256-row area detector computed tomography system: comparison with conventional invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:773-775 (Pubitemid 351221220)
23. Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24:535-546
24. Henneman MM, Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, et al. Noninvasive evaluation with multislice computed tomography in suspected acute coronary syndrome: plaque morphology on multislice computed tomography versus coronary calcium score. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:216-222 (Pubitemid 351934611)
25. Kaufmann PA. Low-dose computed tomography coronary angiography with prospective triggering a promise for the future. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:1456-1457
26. Le Polain de Waroux JB, Pouleur AC, Goffinet C, et al. Combined coronary and late-enhanced multidetector-computed tomography for delineation of the etiology of left ventricular dysfunction: comparison with coronary angiography and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J 2008;29:2544-2551
27. Lindsay AC, Choudhury RP. Form to function: current and future roles for atherosclerosis imaging in drug development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2008;7:517-529
28. Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Evaluation of plaque characteristics in acute coronary syndromes: non-invasive assessment with multi-slice computed tomography and invasive evaluation with intravascular ultrasound radiofrequency data analysis. Eur Heart J 2008;29:2373-2381
29. Rixe J, Rolf A, Conradi G, et al. Image quality on dual-source computed-tomographic coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2008;18:1857-1862
30. Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24:535-546
31. Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Leschka S, et al. Low-dose CT coronary angiography in the step-and-shoot mode: diagnostic performance. Heart 2008;94:1132-1137
32. Schmermund A, Nowak B, Voigtlander T. Non-invasive CT coronary angiography: can high diagnostic image quality be achieved with less radiation exposure? Eur Heart J 2008;24:2955-2956
33. Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, et al. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation 2007;116:1290-1305 (Pubitemid 47517541)
34. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503-1516 (Pubitemid 46588415)
35. Tatsugami F, Husmann L, Herzog BA, et al. Evaluation of a body mass index-adapted protocol for low-dose 64-MDCT coronary angiography with prospective ECG triggering. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:635-638
36. Herzog BA, Husmann L, Burkhard N, et al. Low-dose CT coronary angiography using prospective ECG-triggering: impact of mean heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Acad Radiol 2009;16:15-21.