Image quality and radiation dose of low tube voltage 3rd generation dual-source coronary CT angiography in obese patients: A phantom study

European Radiology

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 1643-1650

  Meinel, Felix G ^a,b   Canstein, Christian ^c   Schoepf, U Joseph ^a   Sedlmaier, Martin ^d   Schmidt, Bernhard ^d   Harris, Brett S ^a   Flohr, Thomas G ^d   De Cecco, Carlo N ^a,e  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c SIEMENS CORPORATE RESEARCH   (United States)

^d SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

^e SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Coronary CT angiography; Dual source CT; Obesity; Phantom; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

IODINE; WATER;

ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING PHANTOM; LOW TUBE VOLTAGE; OBESITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; THIRD GENERATION DUAL SOURCE CORONARY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; TUBE; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; COMPLICATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; IMAGE PROCESSING; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; OBESITY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84902368516     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3194-x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Hausleiter J, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M et al (2010) Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography results of the PROTECTION II Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:1113-1123
2. Siemens (2014) SOMATOM Force. http://www.healthcare.siemens.com/computed- tomography/dual-source-ct/somatom-force. Accessed 2 Jan 2014
3. Winklehner A, Goetti R, Baumueller S et al (2011) Automated attenuation-based tube potential selection for thoracoabdominal computed tomography angiography: improved dose effectiveness. Invest Radiol 46:767-773
4. Ho JS, Barlow CE, Reinhardt DB, Wade WA, Cannaday JJ (2010) Effect of increasing body mass index on image quality and positive predictive value of 100-kV coronary computed tomographic angiography. Am J Cardiol 106:1182-1186
5. Lee AM, Engel LC, Hui GC et al (2013) Coronary computed tomography angiography at 140 kV versus 120 kV: assessment of image quality and radiation exposure in overweight and moderately obese patients. Acta Radiol. doi:10.1177/0284185113502745
6. Bischoff B, Hein F, Meyer T et al (2009) Impact of a reduced tube voltage on CT angiography and radiation dose: results of the PROTECTION I study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2:940-946
7. LaBounty TM, Leipsic J, Poulter R et al (2011) Coronary CT angiography of patients with a normal body mass index using 80 kVp versus 100 kVp: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor randomized trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:W860-W867
8. Ripsweden J, Brismar TB, Holm J et al (2010) Impact on image quality and radiation exposure in coronary CTangiography: 100 kVp versus 120 kVp. Acta Radiol 51:903-909
9. Cao JX, Wang YM, Lu JG, Zhang Y, Wang P, Yang C (2013) Radiation and contrast agent doses reductions by using 80-kV tube voltage in coronary computed tomographic angiography: a comparative study. Eur J Radiol. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.06.032
10. Jun BR, Yong HS, Kang EY, Woo OH, Choi EJ (2012) 64-slice coronary computed tomography angiography using low tube voltage of 80 kV in subjects with normal body mass indices: comparative study using 120 kV. Acta Radiol 53:1099-1106
11. Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Schmid FT et al (2008) Low kilovoltage cardiac dual-source CT: attenuation, noise, and radiation dose. Eur Radiol 18:1809-1817
12. Hou Y, Liu X, Xv S, Guo W, Guo Q (2012) Comparisons of image quality and radiation dose between iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection reconstruction algorithms in 256-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:588-594
13. Renker M, Nance JW Jr, Schoepf UJ et al (2011) Evaluation of heavily calcified vessels with coronary CT angiography: comparison of iterative and filtered back projection image reconstruction. Radiology 260:390-399
14. Yin WH, Lu B, Li N et al (2013) Iterative reconstruction to preserve image quality and diagnostic accuracy at reduced radiation dose in coronary CT angiography: an intraindividual comparison. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:1239-1249
15. Wang R, Schoepf UJ, Wu R et al (2012) Image quality and radiation dose of low dose coronary CT angiography in obese patients: sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol 81:3141-3145
16. Renker M, Geyer LL, Krazinski AW, Silverman JR, Ebersberger U, Schoepf UJ (2013) Iterative image reconstruction: a realistic dose-saving method in cardiac CT imaging? Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 11:403-409
17. McCollough CH, Chen GH, Kalender W et al (2012) Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. Radiology 264:567-580
18. Leipsic J, Heilbron BG, Hague C (2012) Iterative reconstruction for coronary CT angiography: finding its way. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 28:613-620