Image Quality and Dose Reduction by Dual Source Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography: Protocol Comparison. Issue 4 (16th October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Forte, Ernesto; Monti, Serena; Parente, Chiara Anna; Beyer, Lukas; De Rosa, Roberto; Infante, Teresa; Cavaliere, Carlo; Cademartiri, Filippo; Salvatore, Marco; Stroszczynski, Christian; Tedeschi, Carlo
• Is Part Of: Dose-response. Volume 16:Issue 4(2018:Oct./Dec.)
• Publication Date: 2018-10-16
• Subjects: image quality -- radiation dose -- computed tomography coronary angiography -- dual source computed tomography -- coronary artery disease; Dose-response relationship (Biochemistry) -- Periodicals; Drugs -- Dose-response relationship -- Periodicals; Drugs -- Physiological effect -- Periodicals; Hormesis -- Periodicals; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug -- Periodicals; Dose-response relationship (Biochemistry); Drugs -- Dose-response relationship; Drugs -- Physiological effect; Periodicals; 571.634
• DOI: 10.1177/1559325818805838
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1559-3258

Abstract

Purpose: To compare image quality and radiation dose among different protocols in patients who underwent a 128-slice dual source computed tomography coronary angiography (DSCT-CTCA). Methods: Ninety patients were retrospectively grouped according to heart rate (HR): 26 patients (group A) with stable HR ≤60 bpm were acquired using high pitch spiral mode (FLASH); 48 patients (group B) with irregular HR ≤60 bpm or stable HR between 60 and 70 bpm using step and shoot mode; and 16 patients (group C) with irregular HR >60 bpm or stable HR ≥70 bpm by retrospective electrocardiogram pulsing acquisition. Signal to noise ratio (SNR) and contrast to noise ratio (CNR) were measured for the main vascular structures. Moreover, the dose-length product and the effective dose were assessed. Results: Both SNR and CNR were higher in group A compared to group C (18.27 ± 0.32 vs 11.22 ± 0.50 and 16.75 ± 0.32 vs 10.17 ± 0.50; P = .001). The effective dose was lower in groups A and B (2.09 ± 1.27 mSv and 4.60 ± 2.78 mSv, respectively) compared to group C (9.61 ± 5.95 mSv) P < .0001. Conclusion: The correct selection of a low-dose, HR-matched CTCA scan protocol with a DSCT scanner provides substantial reduction of radiation exposure and better SNR and CNR.