Is ECG triggering for motion artefact reduction in dual-source CT angiography of the ascending aorta still required with high-pitch scanning? The role of ECG-gating in high-pitch dual-source CT of the ascending aorta.

OBJECTIVE: : To compare electrocardiographic (ECG)-triggered high-pitch (HP) dual-source CT angiography (CTA) with non-ECG-triggered HP CTA of the aorta, particularly the ascending aorta, with regard to image quality, motion artefacts, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and radiation dose.
METHODS: : 59 consecutive patients who had been referred for CTA for known or suspected aortic disease, previous aortic intervention or planned transapical or transfemoral aortic valve implantation were prospectively included. Patients underwent CTAs with HP, using a dual-source CTA system, with [control group (Group A); n = 30] or without (Group B; n = 29) ECG triggering after randomization. For evaluation, image quality and a motion artefact score (MAS) were assessed in a blinded fashion at different predefined anatomic regions. CNR and SNR were measured at the same levels. Radiation dose estimates and contrast enhancement were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: : There were no significant differences for image quality and MAS. The intra-arterial contrast resolution was significantly higher at the level of the aortic arch and descending aorta in the non-triggered group (CNR values, p = 0.002-0.018). No significant differences in the radiation dose were found.
CONCLUSION: : Non-triggered HP dual-source CTA provided comparable results with regard to image quality, MAS, CNR, SNR and radiation doses compared with ECG-triggered HP CTA. Therefore, ECG triggering of the ascending aorta might be obviated when HP scanning is available. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: HP dual-source CTA might obviate ECG triggering in the ascending aorta. Non-triggered HP CTA of the ascending aorta provides an excellent image quality.