Stefanie Mangold1,2, Julian L Wichmann1,3, U Joseph Schoepf4,5, Zachary B Poole1, Christian Canstein6, Akos Varga-Szemes1, Damiano Caruso1,7, Fabian Bamberg2, Konstantin Nikolaou2, Carlo N De Cecco1. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. schoepf@musc.edu. 5. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. schoepf@musc.edu. 6. Siemens Medical Solutions, Malvern, PA, USA. 7. Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome "Sapienza", Rome, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) and body mass index (BMI) and its effect on image quality and radiation dose of coronary CT angiography (CCTA). METHODS: We evaluated 272 patients who underwent CCTA with 3(rd) generation dual-source CT (DSCT). Prospectively ECG-triggered spiral acquisition was performed with automated tube current selection and advanced iterative reconstruction. Tube voltages were selected by ATVS (70-120 kV). BMI, effective dose (ED), and vascular attenuation in the coronary arteries were recorded. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. Five-point scales were used for subjective image quality analysis. RESULTS: Image quality was rated good to excellent in 98.9 % of examinations without significant differences for proximal and distal attenuation (all p ≥ .0516), whereas image noise was rated significantly higher at 70 kV compared to ≥100 kV (all p < .0266). However, no significant differences were observed in SNR or CNR at 70-120 kV (all p ≥ .0829). Mean ED at 70-120 kV was 1.5 ± 1.2 mSv, 2.4 ± 1.5 mSv, 3.6 ± 2.7 mSv, 5.9 ± 4.0 mSv, 7.9 ± 4.2 mSv, and 10.7 ± 4.1 mSv, respectively (all p ≤ .0414). Correlation analysis showed a moderate association between tube voltage and BMI (r = .639). CONCLUSION: ATVS allows individual tube voltage adaptation for CCTA performed with 3(rd) generation DSCT, resulting in significantly decreased radiation exposure while maintaining image quality. KEY POINTS: • Automated tube voltage selection allows an individual tube voltage adaption in CCTA. • A tube voltage-based reduction of contrast medium volume is feasible. • Image quality was maintained while radiation exposure was significantly decreased. • A moderate association between tube voltage and body mass index was found.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) and body mass index (BMI) and its effect on image quality and radiation dose of coronary CT angiography (CCTA). METHODS: We evaluated 272 patients who underwent CCTA with 3(rd) generation dual-source CT (DSCT). Prospectively ECG-triggered spiral acquisition was performed with automated tube current selection and advanced iterative reconstruction. Tube voltages were selected by ATVS (70-120 kV). BMI, effective dose (ED), and vascular attenuation in the coronary arteries were recorded. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. Five-point scales were used for subjective image quality analysis. RESULTS: Image quality was rated good to excellent in 98.9 % of examinations without significant differences for proximal and distal attenuation (all p ≥ .0516), whereas image noise was rated significantly higher at 70 kV compared to ≥100 kV (all p < .0266). However, no significant differences were observed in SNR or CNR at 70-120 kV (all p ≥ .0829). Mean ED at 70-120 kV was 1.5 ± 1.2 mSv, 2.4 ± 1.5 mSv, 3.6 ± 2.7 mSv, 5.9 ± 4.0 mSv, 7.9 ± 4.2 mSv, and 10.7 ± 4.1 mSv, respectively (all p ≤ .0414). Correlation analysis showed a moderate association between tube voltage and BMI (r = .639). CONCLUSION: ATVS allows individual tube voltage adaptation for CCTA performed with 3(rd) generation DSCT, resulting in significantly decreased radiation exposure while maintaining image quality. KEY POINTS: • Automated tube voltage selection allows an individual tube voltage adaption in CCTA. • A tube voltage-based reduction of contrast medium volume is feasible. • Image quality was maintained while radiation exposure was significantly decreased. • A moderate association between tube voltage and body mass index was found.
Entities:
Keywords:
Automated tube voltage selection; Body mass index; Coronary CT angiography; Image quality; Radiation dose reduction
Authors: James V Spearman; U Joseph Schoepf; Marietta Rottenkolber; Ivo Driesser; Christian Canstein; Kolja M Thierfelder; Aleksander W Krazinski; Carlo N De Cecco; Felix G Meinel Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 11.105
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: Michaela M Hell; Daniel Bittner; Annika Schuhbaeck; Gerd Muschiol; Michael Brand; Michael Lell; Michael Uder; Stephan Achenbach; Mohamed Marwan Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2014-09-16
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: Aleksander W Krazinski; Felix G Meinel; U Joseph Schoepf; Justin R Silverman; Christian Canstein; Carlo N De Cecco; Lucas L Geyer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-07-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Mathias Meyer; Holger Haubenreisser; U Joseph Schoepf; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Christianne Leidecker; Thomas Allmendinger; Ralf Lehmann; Sonja Sudarski; Martin Borggrefe; Stefan O Schoenberg; Thomas Henzler Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-05-31 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marilyn Joy Siegel; Juan Carlos Ramirez-Giraldo; Charles Hildebolt; David Bradley; Bernhard Schmidt Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 6.016
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: Nandini M Meyersohn; Balint Szilveszter; Pedro V Staziaki; Jan-Erik Scholtz; Richard A P Takx; Udo Hoffmann; Brian B Ghoshhajra Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2017-03-22
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