PURPOSE: In light of the increasing use and acceptance of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) coronary angiography it was the purpose of this study to compare reconstruction intervals used in a routine ECG-pulsed MSCT coronary artery angiography setting with frequency controlled patients. METHODS: Examinations were performed on a Siemens Somatom Sensation 64 scanner with a total of 110 ml of contrast agent and ECG pulsing (interval from 40% to 70%) after oral application of a beta-blocker if the heart rate was higher than 65 bpm. All human subjects were referred for the evaluation of suspected coronary artery disease. Coronary artery segments were evaluated by two experienced radiologists in a consensus reading. A ranking of diagnostic image quality (from 1 (no evaluation possible) to 5 (excellent image quality)) was statistically evaluated by Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. RESULTS: In 45 patients (30 male, 15 female, age 63.8 +/- 12.1 years) we detected a significant advantage of the 60% reconstruction interval over 40%, 50%, and 70% (for each p < 0.05). In cases of sudden arrhythmia or movement during the scan, additional reconstruction intervals within the ECG-pulsed reconstruction intervals remained necessary for diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In a routine diagnostic setting with frequency controlled patients and ECG pulsing the 60% reconstruction interval can be considered superior for the initial diagnosis in 64-row multislice computed tomography coronary angiography. However, further information can be derived from various reconstruction intervals such as 40% and 70%.
PURPOSE: In light of the increasing use and acceptance of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) coronary angiography it was the purpose of this study to compare reconstruction intervals used in a routine ECG-pulsed MSCT coronary artery angiography setting with frequency controlled patients. METHODS: Examinations were performed on a Siemens Somatom Sensation 64 scanner with a total of 110 ml of contrast agent and ECG pulsing (interval from 40% to 70%) after oral application of a beta-blocker if the heart rate was higher than 65 bpm. All human subjects were referred for the evaluation of suspected coronary artery disease. Coronary artery segments were evaluated by two experienced radiologists in a consensus reading. A ranking of diagnostic image quality (from 1 (no evaluation possible) to 5 (excellent image quality)) was statistically evaluated by Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. RESULTS: In 45 patients (30 male, 15 female, age 63.8 +/- 12.1 years) we detected a significant advantage of the 60% reconstruction interval over 40%, 50%, and 70% (for each p < 0.05). In cases of sudden arrhythmia or movement during the scan, additional reconstruction intervals within the ECG-pulsed reconstruction intervals remained necessary for diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In a routine diagnostic setting with frequency controlled patients and ECG pulsing the 60% reconstruction interval can be considered superior for the initial diagnosis in 64-row multislice computed tomography coronary angiography. However, further information can be derived from various reconstruction intervals such as 40% and 70%.
Authors: Lotus Desbiolles; Sebastian Leschka; André Plass; Hans Scheffel; Lars Husmann; Oliver Gaemperli; Elisabeth Garzoli; Borut Marincek; Philipp A Kaufmann; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-07-17 Impact factor: 5.315