Lloyd M Felmly1,2, Carlo N De Cecco1, U Joseph Schoepf3,4, Akos Varga-Szemes1, Stefanie Mangold1,5, Andrew D McQuiston1, Sheldon E Litwin1,6, Richard R Bayer1,6, Thomas J Vogl7, Julian L Wichmann1,7. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 2. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. schoepf@musc.edu. 4. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. schoepf@musc.edu. 5. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 6. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 7. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate feasibility, image quality and safety of low-tube-voltage, low-contrast-volume comprehensive cardiac and aortoiliac CT angiography (CTA) for planning transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive TAVR candidates prospectively underwent combined CTA of the aortic root and vascular access route (270 mgI/ml iodixanol). Patients were assigned to group A (second-generation dual-source CT [DSCT], 100 kV, 60 ml contrast, 4.0 ml/s flow rate) or group B (third-generation DSCT, 70 kV, 40 ml contrast, 2.5 ml/s flow rate). Vascular attenuation, noise, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were compared. Subjective image quality was assessed by two observers. Estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) at CTA and follow-up were measured. RESULTS: Besides a higher body-mass-index in group B (24.8±3.8 kg/m2 vs. 28.1±5.4 kg/m2, P=0.0339), patient characteristics between groups were similar (P≥0.0922). Aortoiliac SNR (P=0.0003) was higher in group B. Cardiac SNR (P=0.0003) and CNR (P=0.0181) were higher in group A. Subjective image quality was similar (P≥0.213) except for aortoiliac image noise (4.42 vs. 4.12, P=0.0374). TAVR-planning measurements were successfully obtained in all patients. There were no significant changes in eGFR among and between groups during follow-up (P≥0.302). CONCLUSION: TAVR candidates can be safely and effectively evaluated by a comprehensive CTA protocol with low contrast volume using low-tube-voltage acquisition. KEY POINTS: • Third-generation dual-source CT facilitates low-tube-voltage acquisition. • TAVR planning can be performed with reduced contrast volume and radiation dose. • TAVR-planning CT did not result in changes in creatinine levels at follow-up. • TAVR candidates can be safely evaluated by comprehensive low-tube-voltage CT angiography.
PURPOSE: To investigate feasibility, image quality and safety of low-tube-voltage, low-contrast-volume comprehensive cardiac and aortoiliac CT angiography (CTA) for planning transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive TAVR candidates prospectively underwent combined CTA of the aortic root and vascular access route (270 mgI/ml iodixanol). Patients were assigned to group A (second-generation dual-source CT [DSCT], 100 kV, 60 ml contrast, 4.0 ml/s flow rate) or group B (third-generation DSCT, 70 kV, 40 ml contrast, 2.5 ml/s flow rate). Vascular attenuation, noise, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were compared. Subjective image quality was assessed by two observers. Estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) at CTA and follow-up were measured. RESULTS: Besides a higher body-mass-index in group B (24.8±3.8 kg/m2 vs. 28.1±5.4 kg/m2, P=0.0339), patient characteristics between groups were similar (P≥0.0922). Aortoiliac SNR (P=0.0003) was higher in group B. Cardiac SNR (P=0.0003) and CNR (P=0.0181) were higher in group A. Subjective image quality was similar (P≥0.213) except for aortoiliac image noise (4.42 vs. 4.12, P=0.0374). TAVR-planning measurements were successfully obtained in all patients. There were no significant changes in eGFR among and between groups during follow-up (P≥0.302). CONCLUSION: TAVR candidates can be safely and effectively evaluated by a comprehensive CTA protocol with low contrast volume using low-tube-voltage acquisition. KEY POINTS: • Third-generation dual-source CT facilitates low-tube-voltage acquisition. • TAVR planning can be performed with reduced contrast volume and radiation dose. • TAVR-planning CT did not result in changes in creatinine levels at follow-up. • TAVR candidates can be safely evaluated by comprehensive low-tube-voltage CT angiography.
Authors: Craig R Smith; Martin B Leon; Michael J Mack; D Craig Miller; Jeffrey W Moses; Lars G Svensson; E Murat Tuzcu; John G Webb; Gregory P Fontana; Raj R Makkar; Mathew Williams; Todd Dewey; Samir Kapadia; Vasilis Babaliaros; Vinod H Thourani; Paul Corso; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Jodi J Akin; William N Anderson; Duolao Wang; Stuart J Pocock Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Estelle Claire Nijssen; Marja A P Vermeeren; Marga M A Janssen; Fons A G H Kessels; Vincent V A van Ommen; Roger J M W Rennenberg; Joachim E Wildberger Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Robert Goetti; Stephan Baumüller; Gudrun Feuchtner; Paul Stolzmann; Christoph Karlo; Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.959
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: Daniel O Bittner; Martin Arnold; Lutz Klinghammer; Annika Schuhbaeck; Michaela M Hell; Gerd Muschiol; Soeren Gauss; Michael Lell; Michael Uder; Udo Hoffmann; Stephan Achenbach; Mohamed Marwan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-03-19 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: Lakshmi Ananthakrishnan; Fernando U Kay; Eric A Zeikus; Eugene S Chu; Joseph Chang; John D Barr; Neil M Rofsky; Suhny Abbara Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2022-05-25
Authors: Matthias Eberhard; Gianluca Milanese; Michael Ho; Stefan Zimmermann; Thomas Frauenfelder; Fabian Nietlispach; Francesco Maisano; Felix C Tanner; Thi Dan Linh Nguyen-Kim Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Júlia Karády; Alexisz Panajotu; Márton Kolossváry; Bálint Szilveszter; Ádám L Jermendy; Andrea Bartykowszki; Mihály Károlyi; Csilla Celeng; Béla Merkely; Pál Maurovich-Horvat Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Nina P Hofmann; Moritz Schuetz; Raffi Bekeredjian; Sven Pleger; Emanuel Chorianopoulos; Sorin Giusca; Florian André; Gitsios Gitsioudis; Christopher Schlett; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Hugo A Katus; Grigorios Korosoglou Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2017-06-26