| Literature DB >> 22696000 |
Maxime de Malherbe1, Alain Duhamel, Nunzia Tacelli, Anne-Lise Hachulla, François Pontana, Jean-Baptiste Faivre, Jacques Remy, Martine Remy-Jardin.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accessibility of coronary arteries from chest CT examinations acquired without ECG gating or beta-blockade.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22696000 PMCID: PMC3292649 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-011-0133-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Insights Imaging ISSN: 1869-4101
Percentage of accessible segments according to the stratification of the coronary artery tree
| All patients ( | Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proximal segments (i.e. 4 segments) | 849/968 (88%) | 399/464 (86%) | 450/504 (89%) | 0.12 |
| Proximal and mid segments (i.e. 7 segments) | 1,263/1,694 (75%) | 595/812 (73%) | 668/882 (76%) | 0.24 |
| 10 segments | 1,485/2,420 (61%) | 713/1,160 (61.5%) | 772/1,260 (61%) | 0.92 |
| Complete coronary tree (i.e. 15 segments) | 1,758/3,630 (48%) | 863/1,740 (49.6%) | 895/1,890 (47%) | 0.18 |
*Refers to comparisons between group 1 and 2 obtained with the chi-square test. No significant difference in the percentage of accessible segments was observed between the two patient groups
Mean number of accessible segments per coronary artery
| All patients ( | Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCA (segments 1–4) | 2.15 ± 1.07 | 2.18 ± 0.99 | 2.11 ± 1.14 | 0.65 |
| LAD (segments 6–10) | 2.81 ± 1.06 | 2.95 ± 1.06 | 2.67 ± 1.03 | 0.35 |
| LCX (segments 11–15) | 2.18 ± 1.07 | 2.29 ± 1.12 | 2.08 ± 1.02 | 0.166 |
*Refers to the comparisons between group 1 and 2 obtained with Student’s t-test. No significant difference in the mean number of accessible segments per coronary artery was observed between the two patient groups
Mean number of accessible segments per patient
| Overall study group ( | Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of 4 segments per patient | 3.5 ± 0.78 | 3.44 ± 0.83 | 3.6 ± 0.7 | 0.19 |
| Evaluation of 7 segments per patient | 5.2 ± 1.50 | 5.13 ± 1.56 | 5.3 ± 1.4 | 0.37 |
| Evaluation of 10 segments per patient | 6.1 ± 2.06 | 6.15 ± 2.08 | 6.13 ± 2.04 | 0.94 |
| Evaluation of 15 segments per patient | 7.3 ± 2.77 | 7.44 ± 2.84 | 7.10 ± 2.71 | 0.35 |
*Refers to the comparisons between group 1 and 2 obtained with Student’s t-test. No significant difference in the mean number of accessible segments per patient was observed between the two patient groups
Percentage of patients with accessible coronary segments, stratified from proximal to distal portions of the coronary tree
| All patients ( | Group 1 ( | Group 2 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients with 4 segments accessible | 162 (67%) | 73 (63%) | 89 (71%) | 0.20χ |
| Patients with 7 segments accessible | 55 (23%) | 25 (21.5%) | 30 (24%) | 0.67χ |
| Patients with 10 segments accessible | 7 (3%) | 2 (2%) | 5 (4%) | 0.45* |
| Patients with 15 segments accessible | 0 | 0 | 0 | NA |
NA: not applicable
Comparisons between group 1 and 2 were obtained with chi-square test (χ) or Fisher’s exact test (*). No significant difference in the percentage of patients with four, seven, and ten accessible segments was observed between the two patient groups
Fig. 1A 60-year-old male patient (67 kg, 174 cm, BMI: 22.1 kg/m2) with a heart rate of 82 beats per minute. CT images were obtained with a pitch of 3 and temporal resolution of 83 ms (group 1). Curved multiplanar reformations of the right coronary artery (a), left anterior descending artery (b), and left circumflex artery (c) illustrating the good image quality achievable despite the high heart rate (dose-length product: 167 mGy.cm)