OBJECTIVE: Comparison of coronary artery visualization by multislice spiral CT (MSCT) and electron-beam CT (EBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six minipigs underwent MSCT (collimation 4 x 1 mm, gantry rotation time 500 milliseconds, acquisition time per cardiac cycle 126 +/- 30 milliseconds) and EBCT (slice thickness 1.5 mm, acquisition time per scan 100 milliseconds). Visualized vessel length and contour sharpness was measured, contrast-to-noise ratios were calculated, and the frequency of motion artifacts were evaluated. RESULTS: MSCT depicted significantly longer segments of the coronary tree than EBCT (length: 248.8 vs. 222.8 mm; P < 0.05), delineated the vessel contours more sharply (slope of density curves: 219.2 vs. 160.2 DeltaHU/mm; P < 0.05), and had a higher contrast-to-noise ratio (13.4 vs. 7.3; P < 0.05). The frequency of motion artifacts did not differ between both modalities (94.7% vs. 95.7% of visualized vessel length; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Because its higher spatial resolution and lower image noise, MSCT seems to be superior to EBCT in the visualization of the coronary arteries. Despite different temporal resolutions motion artifacts seem to be similar with both modalities.
OBJECTIVE: Comparison of coronary artery visualization by multislice spiral CT (MSCT) and electron-beam CT (EBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six minipigs underwent MSCT (collimation 4 x 1 mm, gantry rotation time 500 milliseconds, acquisition time per cardiac cycle 126 +/- 30 milliseconds) and EBCT (slice thickness 1.5 mm, acquisition time per scan 100 milliseconds). Visualized vessel length and contour sharpness was measured, contrast-to-noise ratios were calculated, and the frequency of motion artifacts were evaluated. RESULTS: MSCT depicted significantly longer segments of the coronary tree than EBCT (length: 248.8 vs. 222.8 mm; P < 0.05), delineated the vessel contours more sharply (slope of density curves: 219.2 vs. 160.2 DeltaHU/mm; P < 0.05), and had a higher contrast-to-noise ratio (13.4 vs. 7.3; P < 0.05). The frequency of motion artifacts did not differ between both modalities (94.7% vs. 95.7% of visualized vessel length; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Because its higher spatial resolution and lower image noise, MSCT seems to be superior to EBCT in the visualization of the coronary arteries. Despite different temporal resolutions motion artifacts seem to be similar with both modalities.
Authors: F Tatsugami; M Matsuki; G Nakai; Y Inada; S Kanazawa; Y Takeda; H Morita; H Takada; S Yoshikawa; K Fukumura; Y Narumi Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2012-01-17 Impact factor: 3.039