Jian-Xin Cao1, Yi-Min Wang2, Jin-Guo Lu3, Yu Zhang1, Peng Wang1, Cheng Yang1. 1. Department of Radiology, Wuhan 161th Hospital, Wuhan, China. 2. Department of Radiology, Wuhan 161th Hospital, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: wym6669@yahoo.com.cn. 3. Department of Cardiology, Asia Heart Hospital, Wuhan, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of 80-kilovoltage (kV) tube voltage coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) with a reduced amount of contrast agent on qualitative and quantitative image quality parameters and on radiation dose in patients with a body mass index (BMI) <23.0 kg/m(2). METHODS:One hundred and twenty consecutive patients with a BMI <23.0 kg/m(2) and a low calcium load undergoing retrospective electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated dual-source CCTA were randomized into two groups [standard-tube voltage (120-kV) vs. low-tube voltage (80-kV)]. The injection flow rate of contrast agent (350 mg I/mL) was adjusted to body weight of each patient (4.5-5.5 mL/s in the 120-kV group and 2.8-3.8 mL/s in the 80-kV group). Radiation and contrast agent doses were evaluated. Quantitative image quality parameters and figure of merit (FOM) of coronary artery were evaluated. Each coronary segment was evaluated for image quality on a 4-point scale. RESULTS: Compared with the 120-kV group, effective dose and amount of contrast agent in the 80-kV group were decreased by 57.8% and 30.5% (effective dose:2.7 ± 0.5 vs. 6.4 ± 1.3 mSv; amount of contrast agent:57.1 ± 3.2 vs. 82.1 ± 6.1 mL; both p<0.0001), respectively. Image noise was 22.7 ± 2.1HU for 120-kV images and 33.2 ± 5.2 HU for 80-kV images (p<0.0001). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the proximal right coronary artery (RCA) and left main coronary artery (LMA) were all lower in 80-kV than 120-kV images (SNR in the proximal RCA: 16.5 ± 1.8 vs. 19.4 ± 2.8; SNR in the LMA: 16.3 ± 2.0 vs.19.6 ± 2.7; CNR in the proximal RCA: 19.4 ± 2.3 vs.22.9 ± 3.0; CNR in the LMA: 18.8 ± 2.4 vs. 22.7 ± 2.9; all p<0.0001). FOM were all significantly higher in 80-kV than 120-kV images (proximal RCA: 146.7 ± 45.1 vs. 93.4 ± 32.0; LMA: 139.1 ± 47.2 vs. 91.6 ± 31.1; all p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in image quality score between the two groups (3.3 ± 0.8 vs. 3.3 ± 0.8, p=0.068) despite decreased SNR and CNR of coronary artery in the 80-kV group. CONCLUSION: The 80-kV protocol significantly reduces radiation and contrast agent doses in CCTA in patients with a low BMI <23.0 kg/m(2) and a low calcium load while maintaining image quality.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of 80-kilovoltage (kV) tube voltage coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) with a reduced amount of contrast agent on qualitative and quantitative image quality parameters and on radiation dose in patients with a body mass index (BMI) <23.0 kg/m(2). METHODS: One hundred and twenty consecutive patients with a BMI <23.0 kg/m(2) and a low calcium load undergoing retrospective electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated dual-source CCTA were randomized into two groups [standard-tube voltage (120-kV) vs. low-tube voltage (80-kV)]. The injection flow rate of contrast agent (350 mg I/mL) was adjusted to body weight of each patient (4.5-5.5 mL/s in the 120-kV group and 2.8-3.8 mL/s in the 80-kV group). Radiation and contrast agent doses were evaluated. Quantitative image quality parameters and figure of merit (FOM) of coronary artery were evaluated. Each coronary segment was evaluated for image quality on a 4-point scale. RESULTS: Compared with the 120-kV group, effective dose and amount of contrast agent in the 80-kV group were decreased by 57.8% and 30.5% (effective dose:2.7 ± 0.5 vs. 6.4 ± 1.3 mSv; amount of contrast agent:57.1 ± 3.2 vs. 82.1 ± 6.1 mL; both p<0.0001), respectively. Image noise was 22.7 ± 2.1HU for 120-kV images and 33.2 ± 5.2 HU for 80-kV images (p<0.0001). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the proximal right coronary artery (RCA) and left main coronary artery (LMA) were all lower in 80-kV than 120-kV images (SNR in the proximal RCA: 16.5 ± 1.8 vs. 19.4 ± 2.8; SNR in the LMA: 16.3 ± 2.0 vs.19.6 ± 2.7; CNR in the proximal RCA: 19.4 ± 2.3 vs.22.9 ± 3.0; CNR in the LMA: 18.8 ± 2.4 vs. 22.7 ± 2.9; all p<0.0001). FOM were all significantly higher in 80-kV than 120-kV images (proximal RCA: 146.7 ± 45.1 vs. 93.4 ± 32.0; LMA: 139.1 ± 47.2 vs. 91.6 ± 31.1; all p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in image quality score between the two groups (3.3 ± 0.8 vs. 3.3 ± 0.8, p=0.068) despite decreased SNR and CNR of coronary artery in the 80-kV group. CONCLUSION: The 80-kV protocol significantly reduces radiation and contrast agent doses in CCTA in patients with a low BMI <23.0 kg/m(2) and a low calcium load while maintaining image quality.
Authors: Aleksander Kosmala; Bernhard Petritsch; Andreas Max Weng; Thorsten Alexander Bley; Tobias Gassenmaier Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-11-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Moritz H Albrecht; John W Nance; U Joseph Schoepf; Brian E Jacobs; Richard R Bayer; Sheldon E Litwin; Michael A Reynolds; Katharina Otani; Stefanie Mangold; Akos Varga-Szemes; Domenico De Santis; Marwen Eid; Georg Apfaltrer; Christian Tesche; Markus Goeller; Thomas J Vogl; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sock Keow Tan; Chai Hong Yeong; Raja Rizal Azman Raja Aman; Kwan Hoong Ng; Yang Faridah Abdul Aziz; Kok Han Chee; Zhonghua Sun Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-03-29 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: C Schabel; M N Bongers; D Ketelsen; R Syha; C Thomas; G Homann; M Notohamiprodjo; K Nikolaou; F Bamberg Journal: Radiologe Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 0.635
Authors: Amit Pursnani; Eric T Chou; Pearl Zakroysky; Roderick C Deaño; Wilfred S Mamuya; Pamela K Woodard; John T Nagurney; Jerome L Fleg; Hang Lee; David Schoenfeld; James E Udelson; Udo Hoffmann; Quynh A Truong Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-02-20 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Felix G Meinel; Christian Canstein; U Joseph Schoepf; Martin Sedlmaier; Bernhard Schmidt; Brett S Harris; Thomas G Flohr; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Long Jiang Zhang; Li Qi; Carlo N De Cecco; Chang Sheng Zhou; James V Spearman; U Joseph Schoepf; Guang Ming Lu Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 1.889