Comparison of dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (XPERSWING) versus conventional technique in routine practice.

INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES: Coronary angiography is the gold standard for the study of coronary artery disease. This technique requires several orthogonal projections. Rotational angiography is a new technique which involves pre-set rotation of the X-ray tube around the patient and allows visualization of each coronary artery in different views, using a single contrast injection. The purpose of this study was to compare conventional coronary angiography (A) vs rotational angiography (B), focusing on radiation dose, amount of contrast administered, and total procedure time for both diagnostic and therapeutic percutaneous coronary interventions.
METHODS: Prospective study of 104 consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography who were randomized to one of these techniques.
RESULTS: We found a significant reduction in the amount of contrast administered (A vs B, 93.1 [41.7] vs 50.9 [14.7] mL; P<.0001) and radiation exposure (27.6 [11.5] vs 18 [6.4] mGycm(2); P<.0001). A significant increase in total procedure time was noted in the rotational angiography arm. However, when only the last 50 patients were analyzed, we found no difference in procedure time between the groups, probably related to the learning curve of the operators. Angioplasty was performed in 29 patients in group A and 28 patients in group B. Contrast reduction was maintained in the rotational angiography group compared to the conventional technique (A vs B, 335.1 [192.1] vs 238.5 [114.4] mL; P=.02).
CONCLUSIONS: The rotational angiography technique leads to a significant decrease in radiation exposure and contrast dose administered for diagnostic procedures when compared to conventional coronary angiography. In patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention, contrast reduction remains significant.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes