PURPOSE: We compared stair-step artifacts and radiation dose between prospective electrocardiography (ECG)-gated coronary computed tomography angiography (prospective CCTA) and retrospective CCTA using 64-detector CT and determined the optimal padding time (PT) for prospective CCTA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 183 patients [mean heart rate (HR) <65 beats/min, maximum HR instability <5 beats/min] who had undergone CCTA. We scored stair-step artifacts from 1 (severe) to 5 (none) and evaluated the effective dose in 53 patients with retrospective CCTA and 130 with prospective CCTA (PT 200 ms, n = 32; PT 50 ms, n = 98). RESULTS: Mean artifact scores were 4.3 in both retrospective and prospective CCTAs. However, statistically more arteries scored <3 (nonassessable) on prospective CCTA (P < 0.001). Mean scores for prospective CCTA with 200- and 50-ms PT were 4.1 and 4.3, respectively (no significant difference). The radiation dose of prospective CCTA was reduced by 59.1% to 80.7%. CONCLUSION: Prospective CCTA reduces the radiation dose and allows diagnostic imaging in most cases but shows more nonevaluable artifacts than retrospective CCTA. Use of 50-ms instead of 200-ms PT appears to maintain image quality in patients with a mean HR < 65 beats/min and HR instability of <5 beats/min.
PURPOSE: We compared stair-step artifacts and radiation dose between prospective electrocardiography (ECG)-gated coronary computed tomography angiography (prospective CCTA) and retrospective CCTA using 64-detector CT and determined the optimal padding time (PT) for prospective CCTA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 183 patients [mean heart rate (HR) <65 beats/min, maximum HR instability <5 beats/min] who had undergone CCTA. We scored stair-step artifacts from 1 (severe) to 5 (none) and evaluated the effective dose in 53 patients with retrospective CCTA and 130 with prospective CCTA (PT 200 ms, n = 32; PT 50 ms, n = 98). RESULTS: Mean artifact scores were 4.3 in both retrospective and prospective CCTAs. However, statistically more arteries scored <3 (nonassessable) on prospective CCTA (P < 0.001). Mean scores for prospective CCTA with 200- and 50-ms PT were 4.1 and 4.3, respectively (no significant difference). The radiation dose of prospective CCTA was reduced by 59.1% to 80.7%. CONCLUSION: Prospective CCTA reduces the radiation dose and allows diagnostic imaging in most cases but shows more nonevaluable artifacts than retrospective CCTA. Use of 50-ms instead of 200-ms PT appears to maintain image quality in patients with a mean HR < 65 beats/min and HR instability of <5 beats/min.
Authors: W G Austen; J E Edwards; R L Frye; G G Gensini; V L Gott; L S Griffith; D C McGoon; M L Murphy; B B Roe Journal: Circulation Date: 1975-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Bernhard A Herzog; Lars Husmann; Nina Burkhard; Ines Valenta; Oliver Gaemperli; Fuminari Tatsugami; Christophe A Wyss; Uif Landmesser; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Sang Il Choi; Richard T George; Karl H Schuleri; Eun Ju Chun; Joao A C Lima; Albert C Lardo Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-03-03 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Lars Husmann; Bernhard A Herzog; Nina Burkhard; Fuminari Tatsugami; Ines Valenta; Oliver Gaemperli; Christophe A Wyss; Ulf Landmesser; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Frank J Rybicki; Hansel J Otero; Michael L Steigner; Gabriel Vorobiof; Leelakrishna Nallamshetty; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Hale Ersoy; Richard T Mather; Philip F Judy; Tianxi Cai; Karl Coyner; Kurt Schultz; Amanda G Whitmore; Marcelo F Di Carli Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Randi Drees; Rebecca A Johnson; Marie Pinkerton; Alejandro Munoz Del Rio; Jimmy H Saunders; Christopher J François Journal: Vet Radiol Ultrasound Date: 2014-07-26 Impact factor: 1.363
Authors: Ali B Alhailiy; Ernest U Ekpo; Peter L Kench; Elaine A Ryan; Patrick C Brennan; Mark McEntee Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Randi Drees; Alex Frydrychowicz; Scott B Reeder; Marie E Pinkerton; Rebecca Johnson Journal: Vet Radiol Ultrasound Date: 2011-04-26 Impact factor: 1.363