Lei Zhao1, Fabian Plank1, Moritz Kummann1, Philipp Burghard1, Andrea Klauser1, Wolfgang Dichtl1, Gudrun Feuchtner1. 1. 1 Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Department of Radiology, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029, China ; 2 Innsbruck Medical University, Department of Radiology, 3 Innsbruck Medical University, Department of Cardiology, Innrain 52, Christoph-Probst-Platz, 6020 Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare non-calcified plaque delineation and image quality of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) obtained with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (IR) with different filter strengths and filtered back projection (FBP). METHODS: A total of 57 patients [28.1% females; body mass index (BMI) 29.2±6.5 kg/m(2)] were investigated. CCTA was performed using 128-slice dual-source CT. Images were reconstructed with standard FBP and sinogram-affirmed IR using different filter strength (IR-2, IR-3, IR-4) (SAFIRE, Siemens, Germany). Image quality of CCTA and a non-calcified plaque outer border delineation score were evaluated by using a 5-scale score: from 1= poor to 5= excellent. Image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of aortic root, left main (LM) and right coronary artery, and the non-calcified plaque delineation were quantified and compared among the 4 image reconstructions, and were compared between different BMI groups (BMI <28 and ≥28). Statistical analyses included one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), least significant difference (LSD) and Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: There were 71.9% patients in FBP, 96.5% in IR-2, 96.5% in IR-3 and 98.2% in IR-4 who had overall CCTA image quality ≥3, and there were statistical differences in CCTA exam image quality score among those groups, respectively (P<0.001). Sixty-one non-calcified plaques were detected by IR-2 to IR-4, out of those 11 (18%) were missed by FBP. Plaque delineation score increased constantly from FBP (2.7±0.4) to IR-2 (3.2±0.3), to IR-3 (3.5±0.3) up to IR-4 (4.0±0.4), while CNRs of the non-calcifying plaque increased and image noise decreased, respectively. Similarly, CNR of aortic root, LM and right coronary artery improved and image noise declined from FBP to IR-2, IR-3 and IR-4. There were no significant differences of image quality and plaque delineation score between low and high BMI groups within same reconstruction (all P>0.05). Significant differences in image quality and plaque delineation scores among different image reconstructions both in low and high BMI groups (all P<0.001) were found. I4f revealed the highest image quality and plaque delineation score. CONCLUSIONS: IR offers improved image quality and non-calcified plaque delineation as compared with FBP, especially if BMI is increasing. Importantly, 18% of non-calcified plaques were missed with FBP. IR-4 shows the best image quality score and plaque delineation score among the different IR-filter strength.
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare non-calcified plaque delineation and image quality of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) obtained with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (IR) with different filter strengths and filtered back projection (FBP). METHODS: A total of 57 patients [28.1% females; body mass index (BMI) 29.2±6.5 kg/m(2)] were investigated. CCTA was performed using 128-slice dual-source CT. Images were reconstructed with standard FBP and sinogram-affirmed IR using different filter strength (IR-2, IR-3, IR-4) (SAFIRE, Siemens, Germany). Image quality of CCTA and a non-calcified plaque outer border delineation score were evaluated by using a 5-scale score: from 1= poor to 5= excellent. Image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of aortic root, left main (LM) and right coronary artery, and the non-calcified plaque delineation were quantified and compared among the 4 image reconstructions, and were compared between different BMI groups (BMI <28 and ≥28). Statistical analyses included one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), least significant difference (LSD) and Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: There were 71.9% patients in FBP, 96.5% in IR-2, 96.5% in IR-3 and 98.2% in IR-4 who had overall CCTA image quality ≥3, and there were statistical differences in CCTA exam image quality score among those groups, respectively (P<0.001). Sixty-one non-calcified plaques were detected by IR-2 to IR-4, out of those 11 (18%) were missed by FBP. Plaque delineation score increased constantly from FBP (2.7±0.4) to IR-2 (3.2±0.3), to IR-3 (3.5±0.3) up to IR-4 (4.0±0.4), while CNRs of the non-calcifying plaque increased and image noise decreased, respectively. Similarly, CNR of aortic root, LM and right coronary artery improved and image noise declined from FBP to IR-2, IR-3 and IR-4. There were no significant differences of image quality and plaque delineation score between low and high BMI groups within same reconstruction (all P>0.05). Significant differences in image quality and plaque delineation scores among different image reconstructions both in low and high BMI groups (all P<0.001) were found. I4f revealed the highest image quality and plaque delineation score. CONCLUSIONS: IR offers improved image quality and non-calcified plaque delineation as compared with FBP, especially if BMI is increasing. Importantly, 18% of non-calcified plaques were missed with FBP. IR-4 shows the best image quality score and plaque delineation score among the different IR-filter strength.
Authors: Paul Stolzmann; Christopher L Schlett; Pal Maurovich-Horvat; Akiko Maehara; Shixin Ma; Hans Scheffel; Leif-Christopher Engel; Mihály Károlyi; Gary S Mintz; Udo Hoffmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: B M Gramer; D Muenzel; V Leber; A-K von Thaden; H Feussner; A Schneider; M Vembar; N Soni; E J Rummeny; A M Huber Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Tomotaka Dohi; Gary S Mintz; John A McPherson; Bernard de Bruyne; Naim Z Farhat; Alexandra J Lansky; Roxana Mehran; Giora Weisz; Ke Xu; Gregg W Stone; Akiko Maehara Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-07-10
Authors: Alexander W Leber; Andreas Knez; Alexander Becker; Christoph Becker; Franz von Ziegler; Konstantin Nikolaou; Carsten Rist; Maximilian Reiser; Carl White; Gerhard Steinbeck; Peter Boekstegers Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-04-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daniele Marin; Rendon C Nelson; Sebastian T Schindera; Samuel Richard; Richard S Youngblood; Terry T Yoshizumi; Ehsan Samei Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marc R Dweck; Michelle C Williams; Alastair J Moss; David E Newby; Zahi A Fayad Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: J D van Dijk; E D Huizing; P L Jager; J P Ottervanger; S Knollema; C H Slump; J A van Dalen Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-11-12 Impact factor: 2.357