Post-CABG Coronary CT Angiography. Radiation Dose and Graft Image Quality in Retrospective Versus Prospective ECG Gating

Academic Radiology

Volumn 17, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 1122-1127

  Chazen, J Levi ^a   Prince, Martin R ^a   Yip, Rowena ^a   Min, James K ^a   Weinsaft, Jonathan W ^a   Henschke, Claudia I ^a   Cham, Matthew D ^a  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

CABG; CT angiography; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHIC GATING; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EID: 77955414968     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.04.011     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Raff G.L., Gallagher M.J., O'Neill W.W., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005, 46:552-557.
2. Leber A.W., Becker A., Knez A., et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 47:672-677.
3. Hoffmann U., Moselewski F., Cury R.C., et al. Predictive value of 16-slice multidetector spiral computed tomography to detect significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease. Circulation 2004, 110:2638-2643.
4. Mollet N.R., Cademartiri F., van Mieghem C.A.G., et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005, 112:2318-2323.
5. Hoffmann M.H.K., Shi H., Schmitz B.L., et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA 2005, 293:2471-2478.
6. Leber A., Knez A., von Ziegler F., et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005, 46:147-154.
7. Miller J.M., Rochitte C.E., Dewey M., et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008, 359:2324-2336.
8. Achenbach S., Ulzheimer S., Baum U., et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography by retrospectively ECG-gated multislice spiral CT. Circulation 2000, 102:2823.
9. Earls J.P., Berman E.L., Urban B.A., 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.
10. Hirai N., Horiguchi J., Fujioka C., et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG-gated 64-detector coronary CT angiography: assessment of image quality, stenosis, and radiation dose. Radiology 2008, 248:424-430.
11. Knowles N.G., Patel S., Kazerooni E.A. Cardiac CT for acute chest pain in the emergency department: advantages of prospective triggering. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 25(suppl):255-265.
12. Gopal A., Mao S.S., Karlsberg D., et al. Radiation reduction with prospective ECG-triggering acquisition using 64-multidetector computed tomographic angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 25:405-416.
13. Shuman W.P., Branch K.R., May J.M., 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.
14. Hamon M., Lepage O., Malagutti P., et al. Diagnostic performance of 16- and 64-section spiral CT for coronary artery bypass graft assessment: meta-analysis. Radiology 2008, 247:679-686.
15. Jakobs T.F., Becker C.R., Ohnesorge B., et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 2002, 12:1081-1086.
16. Bongartz G., Golding S.J., Jurik A.J., et al. European guidelines for multislice computed tomography: report EUR 16262 EN 2004 2004, European Commission, Luxembourg.
17. Soeken K.L., Prescott P.A. Issues of the use of kappa to estimate reliability. Med Care 1986, 24:733-741.
18. Hausleiter J., Meyer T., Hermann F., et al. estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009, 301:500-507.
19. Hamon M., Biondi-Zoccai G., Malagutti P., et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared against conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 48:1896-1910.
20. Yamamoto M., Kimura F., Niinami H., et al. Noninvasive assessment of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery by 16-channel multidetector-row computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 2006, 81:820-827.
21. Hurwitz L.M., Reiman R.E., Yoshizumi T.T., et al. Radiation dose from contemporary cardiothoracic multidetect CT protocols with an anthropomorphic female phantom: implications for cancer induction. Radiology 2007, 245:742-750.
22. Committee to Assess Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council. Health risk from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2 2006, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
23. Einstein A.J., Henzlova M.J., Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007, 298:317-323.
24. 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 1990, 21-1-201.
25. Kim K.P., Einstein A.J. Berrington de González A. Coronary artery calcification screening: estimated radiation dose and cancer risk. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169:1188-1194.
26. Brenner D.J., Hall E.J. Computed tomography-an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007, 357:2277-2284.
27. Scanlon P.J., Faxon D.P., Audet A., 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.
28. Takakuwa K.M., Halpern E.J. Evaluation of a " triple rule-out" coronary CT angiography protocol: use of 64-Section CT in low-to-moderate risk emergency department patients suspected of having acute coronary syndrome. Radiology 2008, 248:438-446.
29. Takakuwa K.M., Halpern E.J., Gingold E.L., et al. Radiation dose in a " triple rule-out" coronary CT angiography protocol of emergency department patients using 64-MDCT: the impact of ECG-based tube current modulation on age, sex, and body mass index. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 192:866-872.
30. 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.
31. 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.