Dual-source CT coronary angiography involving injection protocol with iodine load tailored to patient body weight and body mass index: Estimation of optimal contrast material dose

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 149-155

  Zhu, Xiaomei ^a   Zhu, Yinsu ^a   Xu, Hai ^a   Yang, Guanyu ^b   Tang, Lijun ^a   Xu, Yi ^a  

^a THE FIRST AFFILIATED HOSPITAL OF NANJING MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SOUTHEAST UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Body mass index; Body weight; Contrast to noise ratio; Coronary CT angiography; Image noise

Indexed keywords

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ANTHROPOMETRY; BLOOD VESSELS; HEALTH; HEART; IODINE;

BODY MASS INDEX; BODY WEIGHT; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; CORONARY CT ANGIOGRAPHIES; IMAGE NOISE;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; DRUG DERIVATIVE; IOHEXOL; IOPROMIDE;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BODY WEIGHT; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BODY MASS INDEX; BODY WEIGHT; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INJECTIONS, INTRAVENOUS; IOHEXOL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84876735478     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/ar.2012.120362     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. 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. European radiology 2006;16: 2739-47
2. Xu Y, Tang L, Zhu X, et al. Comparison of dual-source CT coronary angiography and conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;26 (Suppl. 1): 75-81
3. 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: 147-54
4. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005;26: 1482-7
5. 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: 2318-23
6. Zhu X, Chen W, Li M, et al. Contrast material injection protocol with the flow rate adjusted to the heart rate for dual source CT coronary angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;28: 1557-65
7. 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
8. 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: 575-82
9. Fei X, Du X, Yang Q, et al. 64-MDCT coronary angiography: phantom study of effects of vascular attenuation on detection of coronary stenosis. Am J Roentgenol 2008;191: 43-9
10. Bae KT, Seeck BA, Hildebolt CF, et al. Contrast enhancement in cardiovascular MDCT: effect of body weight, height, body surface area, body mass index, and obesity. Am J Roentgenol 2008;190: 777-84
11. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part II. Effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Radiology 1998;207: 657-62
12. Husmann L, Alkadhi H, Boehm T, et al. Influence of cardiac hemodynamic parameters on coronary artery opacification with 64-slice computed tomography. EurRadiol 2006;16: 1111-6
13. Claves JL, Wise SW, Hopper KD, et al. Evaluation of contrast densities in the diagnosis of carotid stenosis by CT angiography. AmJ Roentgenol 1997;169: 569-73
14. Awai K, Nakayama Y, Nakaura T, et al. Prediction of aortic peak enhancement in monophasic contrast injection protocols at multidetector CT: phantom and patient studies. Radiat Med 2007;25: 14-21
15. Tang L, Zhu X, Xu Y, et al. Factors influencing delay time and coronary arterial density during coronary angiography with DSCT. Acta Radiol 2011;52: 59-63
16. Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, et al. Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 1995;195: 353-7
17. Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2007;28: 2354-60
18. Nakaura T, Awai K, Yauaga Y, et al. Contrast injection protocols for coronary computed tomography angiography using a 64-detector scanner: comparison between patient weight-adjusted- and fixed iodine-dose protocols. Invest Radiol 2008;43: 512-9
19. Seifarth H, Puesken M, Kalafut JF, et al. Introduction of an individually optimized protocol for the injection of contrast medium for coronary CT angiography. Eur Radiol 2009;19: 2373-82
20. Bae KT. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology 2010;256: 32-61
21. Zhu X, Zhu Y, Xu H, et al. The influence of body mass index and gender on coronary arterial attenuation with fixed iodine load per body weight at dual-source CT coronary angiography. Acta Radiol 2012;53: 637-42
22. Lembcke A, Wiese TH, Schnorr J, et al. Image quality of noninvasive coronary angiography using multislice spiral computed tomography and electron-beam computed tomography: intraindividual comparison in an animal model. Invest Radiol 2004;39: 357-64
23. Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, et al. Comparison of image quality in contrast-enhanced coronary-artery visualization by electron beam tomography and retrospectively electrocardiogramgated multislice spiral computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2003;38: 119-28
24. Herzog BA, Husmann L, Valenta I, et al. Determinants of vessel contrast in BMI-adapted low dose CT coronary angiography with prospective ECG-triggering. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25: 625-30
25. Becker CR, Hong C, Knez A, et al. Optimal contrast application for cardiac 4-detector-row computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2003;38: 690-4
26. Awai K, Hiraishi K, Hori S. Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Radiology 2004;230: 142-50
27. Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S, et al. Abdominal multidetector CT in patients with varying body fat percentages: estimation of optimal contrast material dose. Radiology 2008;249: 872-7
28. Yanaga Y, Awai K, Nakaura T, et al. Effect of contrast injection protocols with dose adjusted to the estimated lean patient body weight on aortic enhancement at CT angiography. Am J Roentgenol 2009;192: 1071-8
29. Ho LM, Nelson RC, Delong DM. Determining contrast medium dose and rate on basis of lean body weight: does this strategy improve patient-to-patient uniformity of hepatic enhancement during multi-detector row CT? Radiology 2007;243: 431-7
30. Boer P. Estimated lean body mass as an index for normalization of body fluid volumes in humans. Am J Physiol 1984;247:F632-6
31. 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. Am J Roentgenol 2009;192: 635-8
32. Jung B, Mahnken AH, Stargardt A, et al. Individually weight-adapted examination protocol in retrospectively ECG-gated MSCT of the heart. Eur Radiol 2003;13: 2560-6
33. Irie T, Inoue H. Individual modulation of the tube current-seconds to achieve similar levels of image noise in contrast-enhanced abdominal CT. Am J Roentgenol 2005;184: 1514-8
34. Husmann L, Leschka S, Boehm T, et al. [Influence of body mass index on coronary artery opacification in 64-slice CT angiography]. Rofo 2006;178: 1007-13
35. Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G. Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology 2000;217:430-5 Institutions