SCCT guidelines for the performance and acquisition of coronary computed tomographic angiography: A report of the society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee: Endorsed by the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI)

Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 435-449

  Abbara, Suhny ^a   Blanke, Philipp ^b   Maroules, Christopher D ^a   Cheezum, Michael ^c   Choi, Andrew D ^d   Han, B Kelly ^e   Marwan, Mohamed ^f   Naoum, Chris ^g   Norgaard, Bjarne L ^h   Rubinshtein, Ronen ⁱ   Schoenhagen, Paul ^k   Villines, Todd ^j   Leipsic, Jonathon ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^c Ft Belvoir Community Hospital   (United States)

^d GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^e MINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE FOUNDATION   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ERLANGEN   (Germany)

^g UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^h AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

ⁱ CARMEL MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^j WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^k CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Performance and acquisition of Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; NITRIC ACID DERIVATIVE;

ARTICLE; BREATH HOLDING; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CONTRAST; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; DATA ANALYSIS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INFORMED CONSENT; IONIZING RADIATION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATIENT POSITIONING; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION MONITORING; SCREENING; TUBE; VASCULAR ACCESS; CARDIOLOGY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONSENSUS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

CARDIOLOGY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY; CONSENSUS; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY VESSELS; HUMANS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 85001687875     PISSN: 19345925     EISSN: 1876861X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2016.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (99)

1. 1 Abbara, S., Arbab-Zadeh, A., Callister, T.Q., et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 3:3 (2009), 190–204.
2. 2 Leipsic, J., Abbara, S., Achenbach, S., et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary CT angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 8:5 (2014), 342–358.
3. 3 Taylor, A.J., Cerqueira, M., Hodgson, J.M., et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of cardiology foundation appropriate use criteria task force, the society of cardiovascular computed tomography, the American College of radiology, the American heart association, the American society of Echocardiography, the American society of Nuclear cardiology, the North American society for cardiovascular imaging, the society for cardiovascular angiography and Interventions, and the society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:22 (2010), 1864–1894.
4. 4 Budoff, M.J., Dowe, D., Jollis, J.G., et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 52:21 (2008), 1724–1732.
5. 5 Meijboom, W.B., Meijs, M.F., Schuijf, J.D., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 52:25 (2008), 2135–2144.
6. 6 Miller, J.M., Rochitte, C.E., Dewey, M., et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N. Engl J Med 359:22 (2008), 2324–2336.
7. 7 Budoff, M.J., Cohen, M.C., Garcia, M.J., et al. ACCF/AHA clinical competence statement on cardiac imaging with computed tomography and magnetic ResonanceA report of the American College of cardiology foundation/American heart association/American College of physicians task force on clinical competence and training. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:2 (2005), 383–402.
8. 8 Jacobs, J.E., Boxt, L.M., Desjardins, B., et al. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). Journal of the American College of Radiology. JACR 3:9 (2006), 677–685.
9. 9 Halliburton, S.S., Abbara, S., Chen, M.Y., et al. SCCT guidelines on radiation dose and dose-optimization strategies in cardiovascular CT. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 5:4 (2011), 198–224.
10. 10 Valentin J. Pregnancy and medical radiation: ICRP publication 84. Ann ICRP 2000(30(1)):1–39.
11. 11 Webb, J.A., Thomsen, H.S., Morcos, S.K., Members of contrast media safety committee of European society of Urogenital R. The use of iodinated and gadolinium contrast media during pregnancy and lactation. Eur Radiol 15:6 (2005), 1234–1240.
12. 12 Rubin, G., Bluemke, D., Duerinckx, A., et al. ACR Committee on Cardiac Imaging. Practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). (Res. 10, 16g, 17, 34, 35, 36 – 2006) Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards, 2008, American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, 421–430.
13. 13 Greenberger, P., Patterson, R., Prednisone-diphenhydramine regimen prior to use of radiographic contrast media. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 63(4), 1979, 295.
14. 14 Elicker, B.M., Cypel, Y.S., Weinreb, J.C., IV contrast administration for CT: a survey of practices for the screening and prevention of contrast nephropathy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:6 (2006), 1651–1658.
15. 15 Lee, J.K., Warshauer, D.M., Bush, W.H. Jr., McClennan, B.L., Choyke, P.L., Determination of serum creatinine level before intravenous administration of iodinated contrast medium. A Surv Investig Radiol 30:12 (1995), 700–705.
16. 16 Ellis, J., Davenport, M., Dillman, J., et al. ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. 2016, American College of Radiology Version 10.2.
17. 17 Briguori, C., Airoldi, F., D'Andrea, D., et al. Renal insufficiency following contrast media administration trial (REMEDIAL): a randomized comparison of 3 preventive strategies. Circulation 115:10 (2007), 1211–1217.
18. 18 Briguori, C., Colombo, A., Violante, A., et al. Standard vs double dose of N-acetylcysteine to prevent contrast agent associated nephrotoxicity. Eur Heart J 25:3 (2004), 206–211.
19. 19 Lee, P.T., Chou, K.J., Liu, C.P., et al. Renal protection for coronary angiography in advanced renal failure patients by prophylactic hemodialysis. A randomized controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 50:11 (2007), 1015–1020.
20. 20 Marenzi, G., Assanelli, E., Marana, I., et al. N-acetylcysteine and contrast-induced nephropathy in primary angioplasty. N. Engl J Med 354:26 (2006), 2773–2782.
21. 21 Newhouse, J.H., Kho, D., Rao, Q.A., Starren, J., Frequency of serum creatinine changes in the absence of iodinated contrast material: implications for studies of contrast nephrotoxicity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:2 (2008), 376–382.
22. 22 McDonald, R.J., McDonald, J.S., Carter, R.E., et al. Intravenous contrast material exposure is not an independent risk factor for dialysis or mortality. Radiology 273:3 (2014), 714–725.
23. 23 Owen, R.J., Hiremath, S., Myers, A., Fraser-Hill, M., Barrett, B.J., Canadian Association of Radiologists consensus guidelines for the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy: update 2012. Can Assoc Radiologists J 65:2 (2014), 96–105 = J l'Association Can des radiologistes.
24. 24 Ahuja, T.S., Niaz, N., Agraharkar, M., Contrast-induced nephrotoxicity in renal allograft recipients. Clin Nephrol 54:1 (2000), 11–14.
25. 25 Brodoefel, H., Reimann, A., Heuschmid, M., et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with 16-slice spiral computed tomography: image quality in patients with high heart rates. Eur Radiol 16:7 (2006), 1434–1441.
26. 26 Cademartiri, F., Mollet, N.R., Runza, G., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography is improved at low heart rates. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 22:1 (2006), 7–9 101-5; discussion.
27. 27 Achenbach, S., Manolopoulos, M., Schuhback, A., et al. Influence of heart rate and phase of the cardiac cycle on the occurrence of motion artifact in dual-source CT angiography of the coronary arteries. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 6:2 (2012), 91–98.
28. 28 Le Jemtel, T.H., Padeletti, M., Jelic, S., Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in patients with coexistent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 49:2 (2007), 171–180.
29. 29 Maffei, E., Palumbo, A.A., Martini, C., et al. In-house” pharmacological management for computed tomography coronary angiography: heart rate reduction, timing and safety of different drugs used during patient preparation. Eur Radiol 19:12 (2009), 2931–2940.
30. 30 Roberts, W.T., Wright, A.R., Timmis, J.B., Timmis, A.D., Safety and efficacy of a rate control protocol for cardiac CT. Br J Radiology 82:976 (2009), 267–271.
31. 31 Earls, J.P., How to use a prospective gated technique for cardiac CT. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 3:1 (2009), 45–51.
32. 32 Sadamatsu, K., Koide, S., Nakano, K., Yoshida, K., Heart rate control with single administration of a long-acting beta-blocker at bedtime before coronary computed tomography angiography. J Cardiol 65:4 (2015), 293–297.
33. 33 Clayton, B., Raju, V., Roobottom, C., Morgan-Hughes, G., Safety of intravenous beta-adrenoceptor blockers for computed tomographic coronary angiography. Br J Clin Pharmacol 79:3 (2015), 533–536.
34. 34 Kassamali, R.H., Kim, D.H., Patel, H., et al. Safety of an i.v. beta-adrenergic blockade protocol for heart rate optimization before coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:4 (2014), 759–762.
35. 35 Wang, J.D., Zhang, H.W., Xin, Q., et al. Safety and efficacy of intravenous esmolol before prospective electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition for computed tomography coronary angiography. J Geriatric Cardiol JGC 11:1 (2014), 39–43.
36. 36 Dobre, D., Borer, J.S., Fox, K., et al. Heart rate: a prognostic factor and therapeutic target in chronic heart failure. The distinct roles of drugs with heart rate-lowering properties. Eur J Heart Fail 16:1 (2014), 76–85.
37. 37 Pichler, P., Pichler-Cetin, E., Vertesich, M., et al. Ivabradine versus metoprolol for heart rate reduction before coronary computed tomography angiography. Am J Cardiol 109:2 (2012), 169–173.
38. 38 Celik, O., Atasoy, M.M., Erturk, M., et al. Comparison of different strategies of ivabradine premedication for heart rate reduction before coronary computed tomography angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 8:1 (2014), 77–82.
39. 39 Cademartiri, F., Garot, J., Tendera, M., Zamorano, J.L., Intravenous ivabradine for control of heart rate during coronary CT angiography: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 9:4 (2015), 286–294.
40. 40 Parker, J.D., Parker, J.O., Nitrate therapy for stable angina pectoris. N. Engl J Med 338:8 (1998), 520–531.
41. 41 Dewey, M., Hoffmann, H., Hamm, B., Multislice CT coronary angiography: effect of sublingual nitroglycerine on the diameter of coronary arteries. RoFo. Fortschritte dem Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nukl 178:6 (2006), 600–604.
42. 42 Decramer, I., Vanhoenacker, P.K., Sarno, G., et al. Effects of sublingual nitroglycerin on coronary lumen diameter and number of visualized septal branches on 64-MDCT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1 (2008), 219–225.
43. 43 Laslett, L.J., Baker, L., Sublingual nitroglycerin administered by spray versus tablet: comparative timing of hemodynamic effects. Cardiology 77:4 (1990), 303–310.
44. 44 Bachmann, K.F., Gansser, R.E., Nitroglycerin oral spray: evaluation of its coronary artery dilative action by quantitative angiography. Am J Cardiol 61:9 (1988), 7E–11E.
45. 45 Takx, R.A., Sucha, D., Park, J., Leiner, T., Hoffmann, U., Sublingual nitroglycerin administration in coronary computed tomography angiography: a systematic review. Eur Radiol 25:12 (2015), 3536–3542.
46. 46 Wang, G., Vannier, M.W., Spatial variation of section sensitivity profile in spiral computed tomography. Med Phys 21:9 (1994), 1491–1497.
47. 47 Ohnesorge, B., Flohr, T., Becker, C., et al. Cardiac imaging by means of electrocardiographically gated multisection spiral CT: initial experience. Radiology 217:2 (2000), 564–571.
48. 48 Halliburton, S.S., Abbara, S., Practical tips and tricks in cardiovascular computed tomography: patient preparation for optimization of cardiovascular CT data acquisition. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 1:1 (2007), 62–65.
49. 49 Bae, K.T., Tran, H.Q., Heiken, J.P., Multiphasic injection method for uniform prolonged vascular enhancement at CT angiography: pharmacokinetic analysis and experimental porcine model. Radiology 216:3 (2000), 872–880.
50. 50 Fleischmann, D., Rubin, G.D., Bankier, A.A., Hittmair, K., Improved uniformity of aortic enhancement with customized contrast medium injection protocols at CT angiography. Radiology 214:2 (2000), 363–371.
51. 51 Haage, P., Schmitz-Rode, T., Hubner, D., Piroth, W., Gunther, R.W., Reduction of contrast material dose and artifacts by a saline flush using a double power injector in helical CT of the thorax. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:4 (2000), 1049–1053.
52. 52 Hopper, K.D., Mosher, T.J., Kasales, C.J., TenHave, T.R., Tully, D.A., Weaver, J.S., Thoracic spiral CT: delivery of contrast material pushed with injectable saline solution in a power injector. Radiology 205:1 (1997), 269–271.
53. 53 Raju, R., Thompson, A.G., Lee, K., et al. Reduced iodine load with CT coronary angiography using dual-energy imaging: a prospective randomized trial compared with standard coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 8:4 (2014), 282–288.
54. 54 Carrascosa, P., Leipsic, J.A., Capunay, C., et al. Monochromatic image reconstruction by dual energy imaging allows half iodine load computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur J Radiology 84:10 (2015 Oct), 1915–1920, 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.06.019.
55. 55 Yin, W.H., Lu, B., Gao, J.B., et al. Effect of reduced x-ray tube voltage, low iodine concentration contrast medium, and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose at coronary CT angiography: results of the prospective multicenter REALISE trial. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 9:3 (2015), 215–224.
56. 56 Segal, A., Ellis, J., Baumgartner, B., et al. ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. Practice guideline for the use of intravascular contrast media. (Res. 38 – 2007). Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards, 2008, American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, 73–78.
57. 57 Segal, A., Ellis, J., Baumgartner, B., et al. ACR committee on drugs and contrast media. Manual on contrast media. Version 6. 2008, American College of Radiology, Reston, VA.
58. 58 Verdun, F.R., Bochud, F., Gundinchet, F., Aroua, A., Schnyder, P., Meuli, R., Quality initiatives* radiation risk: what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics 28:7 (2008), 1807–1816.
59. 59 Brenner, D.J., Doll, R., Goodhead, D.T., et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U. S. A 100:24 (2003), 13761–13766.
60. 60 Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation; Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board, Division on earth and life studies, National research council of the National academies. health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. BEIR VII Phase 2, 2006, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
61. 61 Don, S., Radiosensitivity of children: potential for overexposure in CR and DR and magnitude of doses in ordinary radiographic examinations. Pediatr Radiol 34:Suppl 3 (2004), S167–S172 discussion 234–S241.
62. 62 Einstein, A.J., Henzlova, M.J., Rajagopalan, S., Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. Jama 298:3 (2007), 317–323.
63. 63 Cohen, M.D., ALARA, image gently and CT-induced cancer. Pediatr Radiol 45:4 (2015), 465–470.
64. 64 Cody, D.D., Brateman, L.F., Favinger, J., et al. ACR appropriateness criteria radiation dose assessment introduction. 2015.
65. 65 Deseive, S., Chen, M.Y., Korosoglou, G., et al. Prospective randomized trial on radiation dose estimates of CT angiography applying iterative image reconstruction: the protection V study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 8:8 (2015), 888–896.
66. 66 Deseive, S., Pugliese, F., Meave, A., et al. Image quality and radiation dose of a prospectively electrocardiography-triggered high-pitch data acquisition strategy for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, randomized PROTECTION IV study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 9:4 (2015), 278–285.
67. 67 Hausleiter, J., Martinoff, S., Hadamitzky, M., et al. Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography results of the PROTECTION II Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:11 (2010), 1113–1123.
68. 68 Hausleiter, J., Meyer, T.S., Martuscelli, E., et al. Image quality and radiation exposure with prospectively ECG-triggered axial scanning for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, multivendor, randomized PROTECTION-III study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 5:5 (2012), 484–493.
69. 69 Chen, M.Y., Shanbhag, S.M., Arai, A.E., Submillisievert median radiation dose for coronary angiography with a second-generation 320-detector row CT scanner in 107 consecutive patients. Radiology 267:1 (2013), 76–85.
70. 70 Stehli, J., Fuchs, T.A., Bull, S., et al. Accuracy of coronary CT angiography using a submillisievert fraction of radiation exposure: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 64:8 (2014), 772–780.
71. 71 Khan, A., Nasir, K., Khosa, F., Saghir, A., Sarwar, S., Clouse, M.E., Prospective gating with 320-MDCT angiography: effect of volume scan length on radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:2 (2011), 407–411.
72. 72 Task Group on Control of Radiation Dose in Computed T, Managing patient dose in computed tomography. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 30:4 (2000), 7–45.
73. 73 Hausleiter, J., Meyer, T., Hadamitzky, M., et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 113:10 (2006), 1305–1310.
74. 74 Siegel, M.J., Schmidt, B., Bradley, D., Suess, C., Hildebolt, C., Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 233:2 (2004), 515–522.
75. 75 Leipsic, J., LaBounty, T.M., Mancini, G.B., et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial to assess the diagnostic performance of reduced tube voltage for coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:4 (2011), 801–806.
76. 76 Zhang, L.J., Wang, Y., Schoepf, U.J., et al. Image quality, radiation dose, and diagnostic accuracy of prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch coronary CT angiography at 70 kVp in a clinical setting: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 26:3 (2016), 797–806.
77. 77 Hell, M.M., Bittner, D., Schuhbaeck, A., et al. Prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch coronary angiography with third-generation dual-source CT at 70 kVp tube voltage: feasibility, image quality, radiation dose, and effect of iterative reconstruction. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 8:6 (2014), 418–425.
78. 78 Oda, S., Utsunomiya, D., Funama, Y., et al. A hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm that improves the image quality of low-tube-voltage coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:5 (2012), 1126–1131.
79. 79 Williams, M.C., Weir, N.W., Mirsadraee, S., et al. Iterative reconstruction and individualized automatic tube current selection reduce radiation dose while maintaining image quality in 320-multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography. Clin Radiol 68:11 (2013), e570–e5707.
80. 80 Funama, Y., Utsunomiya, D., Taguchi, K., Oda, S., Shimonobo, T., Yamashita, Y., Automatic exposure control at single- and dual-heartbeat CTCA on a 320-MDCT volume scanner: effect of heart rate, exposure phase window setting, and reconstruction algorithm. Phys Med 30:3 (2014), 385–390.
81. 81 Mayo, J.R., Leipsic, J.A., Radiation dose in cardiac CT. Am J Roentgenol 192:3 (2009), 646–653.
82. 82 Leipsic, J., LaBounty, T.M., Ajlan, A.M., et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing image quality, study interpretability, and radiation dose of narrow acquisition window with widened acquisition window protocols in prospectively ECG-triggered coronary computed tomography angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 7:1 (2013), 18–24.
83. 83 Rybicki, F.J., Otero, H.J., Steigner, M.L., et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 24:5 (2008), 535–546.
84. 84 Raju, R., Cury, R.C., Precious, B., et al. Comparison of image quality, and diagnostic interpretability of a new volumetric high temporal resolution scanner versus 64-slice MDCT. Clin Imaging 40:2 (2016), 205–211.
85. 85 Achenbach, S., Marwan, M., Schepis, T., et al. High-pitch spiral acquisition: a new scan mode for coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 3:2 (2009), 117–121.
86. 86 Amis, E.S. Jr., Butler, P.F., ACR white paper on radiation dose in medicine: three years later. J Am Col Radiol JACR 7:11 (2010), 865–870.
87. 87 Foley, S.J., McEntee, M.F., Achenbach, S., Brennan, P.C., Rainford, L.S., Dodd, J.D., Breast surface radiation dose during coronary CT angiography: reduction by breast displacement and lead shielding. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:2 (2011), 367–373.
88. 88 Deak, P.D., Smal, Y., Kalender, W.A., Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 257:1 (2010), 158–166.
89. 89 Hecht, H.S., Bhatti, T., How much calcium is too much calcium for coronary computerized tomographic angiography?. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2:3 (2008), 183–187.
90. 90 Yan, R.T., Miller, J.M., Rochitte, C.E., et al. Predictors of inaccurate coronary arterial stenosis assessment by CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:9 (2013), 963–972.
91. 91 Schuhbaeck, A., Schmid, J., Zimmer, T., et al. Influence of the coronary calcium score on the ability to rule out coronary artery stenoses by coronary CT angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 10:5 (2016 Sep-Oct), 343–350.
92. 92 Kondo, T., Kumamaru, K.K., Fujimoto, S., et al. Prospective ECG-gated coronary 320-MDCT angiography with absolute acquisition delay strategy for patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201:6 (2013), 1197–1203.
93. 93 Marwan, M., Pflederer, T., Schepis, T., et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT to identify significant coronary artery disease in patients with uncontrolled hypertension presenting with chest pain: comparison with coronary angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 28:5 (2012), 1173–1180.
94. 94 Scheske, J.A., O'Brien, J.M., Earls, J.P., et al. Coronary artery imaging with single-source rapid kilovolt peak-switching dual-energy CT. Radiology 268:3 (2013), 702–709.
95. 95 Maintz, D., Seifarth, H., Raupach, R., et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol 16:4 (2006), 818–826.
96. 96 Seifarth, H., Raupach, R., Schaller, S., et al. Assessment of coronary artery stents using 16-slice MDCT angiography: evaluation of a dedicated reconstruction kernel and a noise reduction filter. Eur Radiol 15:4 (2005), 721–726.
97. 97 Matsumoto, H., Kondo, T., Watanabe, S., et al. ECG-edited middiastolic phase reconstruction improves image quality at 64-MDCT coronary angiography of patients with atrial fibrillation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:6 (2008), 1659–1666.
98. 98 Schnapauff, D., Teige, F., Hamm, B., Dewey, M., Comparison between the image quality of multisegment and halfscan reconstructions of non-invasive CT coronary angiography. Br J Radiology 82:984 (2009), 969–975.
99. 99 Yoshioka, K., Tanaka, R., Muranaka, K., et al. Subtraction coronary CT angiography using second-generation 320-detector row CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 31:Suppl 1 (2015), 51–58.