Dual-source versus 64-section CT coronary angiography at lower heart rates: Comparison of accuracy and radiation dose

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 56-64

  Baumüller, Stephan ^a   Leschka, Sebastian ^a   Desbiolles, Lotus ^a   Stolzmann, Paul ^a   Scheffel, Hans ^a   Seifert, Burkhardt ^b   Marincek, Borut ^a   Alkadhi, Hatem ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BELOC ZOK; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; IOPROMIDE; ISOSORBIDE DINITRATE; METOPROLOL TARTRATE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; DRUG DERIVATIVE; IOHEXOL;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DUAL SOURCE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; HEART RATE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; ARTIFACT; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RADIOGRAPHY; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTIFACTS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY STENOSIS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEART RATE; HUMANS; IOHEXOL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 70350517464     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2531090065     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Hunink MG, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography by using different generations of multisection scanners: single-center experience. Radiology 2008;246:384-393.
2. Kuettner A, Kopp AF, Schroeder S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with angiographically proven coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43:831-839.
3. Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology: initial clinical results. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1230-1237.
4. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43: 2265-2270.
5. 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.
6. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:552-557.
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.
8. 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.
9. Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C, et al. Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:111-117.
10. Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K, et al. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- x 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:343-348.
11. Ehara M, Surmely JF, Kawai M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population: comparison with conventional invasive angiography. Circ J 2006;70:564-571.
12. Herzog C, Zwerner PL, Doll JR, et al. Significant coronary artery stenosis: comparison on per-patient and per-vessel or per-segment basis at 64-section CT angiography. Radiology 2007;244:112-120.
13. Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2739-2747.
14. Ropers U, Ropers D, Pflederer T, et al. Influence of heart rate on the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:2393-2398.
15. Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Busch S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Invest Radiol 2007;42:684-691.
16. Alkadhi H, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L, et al. Dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography: influence of obesity, calcium load, and heart rate on diagnostic accuracy. Eur Heart J 2008;29:766-776.
17. Weustink AC, Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, et al. Reliable high-speed coronary computed tomography in symptomatic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:786-794.
18. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol 2006;16:575-582.
19. 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.
20. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Manzke R, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 16-detector row CT: effect of heart rate. Radiology 2005;234:86-97.
21. Pannu HK, AlvarezWJr, Fishman EK. Beta-blockers for cardiac CT: a primer for the radiologist. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186(6 suppl 2):S341-S345.
22. Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, et al. First performance evaluation of a dualsource CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:256-268.
23. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Holle J, Muschiol G, Daniel WG, Moshage W. In-plane coronary arterial motion velocity: measurement with electron-beam CT. Radiology 2000;216: 457-463.
24. Matt D, Scheffel H, Leschka S, et al. Dual-source CT coronary angiography: image quality, mean heart rate, and heart rate variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:567-573.
25. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Saba O, et al. Dose performance of a 64-channel dual-source CT scanner. Radiology 2007;243: 775-784.
26. Stolzmann P, Scheffel H, Schertler T, et al. Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2008;18:592-599.
27. Halliburton SS, Sola S, Kuzmiak SA, et al. Effect of dual-source cardiac computed tomography on patient radiation dose in a clinical setting: comparison to single-source imaging. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2008;2: 392-400.
28. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Husmann L, et al. Effect of decrease in heart rate variability on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1583-1590.
29. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L, et al. Combining dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography and calcium scoring: added value for the assessment of coronary artery disease. Heart 2008;94: 1154-1161.
30. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L, et al. Image quality and reconstruction intervals of dual-source CT coronary angiography: recommendations for ECG-pulsing windowing. Invest Radiol 2007;42:543-549.
31. 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 Cardiovasc Surg, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975; 51:5-40.
32. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multi-slice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006; 113:1305-1310.
33. Morin RL. Monte Carlo simulation in the radiological sciences. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC, 1988.
34. Stein PD, Beemath A, Kayali F, Skaf E, Sanchez J, Olson RE. Multidetector computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2006;119:203-216.
35. Sun Z, Jiang W. Diagnostic value of multi-slice computed tomography angiography in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2006;60:279-286.
36. Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography-meta-analysis. Radiology 2007;245: 720-731.
37. Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Zhang J, Fletcher JG. Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT. RadioGraphics 2006; 26:1785-1794.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008;248:431-437.