Yu Chen1, Xiaobo Zhang1, Huadan Xue1, Yuanli Zhu1, Yun Wang1, Yumei Li1, Zhuhua Zhang1, Zhengyu Jin2. 1. Department of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, No.1 Shuai Fu Yuan, Dong Cheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. 2. Department of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, No.1 Shuai Fu Yuan, Dong Cheng District, Beijing, 100730, China. jinzy_pumch@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was conducted in order to evaluate the image quality of 70 kVp and 25 mL contrast medium (CM) volumefor head and neckcomputed tomographic angiography (CTA) and assess the diagnostic accuracy for arterial stenosis. METHODS:Fifty patients were prospectively divided into two groups randomly: group A (n = 25), 70 kVp with 25 mL CM, and group B (n = 25), 100 kVp with 40 mL CM. CT attenuation values, noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the shoulder, neck, and cerebral arteries were measured for objective image quality. Subjective image quality of the shoulder and cerebral arteries was also evaluated. For patients undergoing digital subtracted angiography (DSA), diagnostic accuracy of CTA was assessed with DSA as reference standard. RESULTS: The SNRs of the shoulder, neck, and cerebral arteries in group A were higher than those in group B (P < 0.05). The CNRs of the shoulder and neck arteries in group A were higher than those in group B (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in subjective image quality of arteries between group A and group B (P > 0.05). The accuracy was noted as 94.0% (156/166) in group A and 97.1% (134/138) in group B for ≥ 50% stenosis. The accuracy of intracranial arterial stenosis was lower than that of extracranial arterial stenosis in group A. The radiation dose of group A was significantly decreased by 56% than that of group B. CONCLUSION: Head and neck CTA at 70 kVp using 25 mL CM can obtain diagnostic image quality with lower radiation dose while maintaining high accuracy in detecting the arterial stenosis compared with the 100-kVp and 40-mL CM.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This study was conducted in order to evaluate the image quality of 70 kVp and 25 mL contrast medium (CM) volume for head and neck computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and assess the diagnostic accuracy for arterial stenosis. METHODS: Fifty patients were prospectively divided into two groups randomly: group A (n = 25), 70 kVp with 25 mL CM, and group B (n = 25), 100 kVp with 40 mL CM. CT attenuation values, noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the shoulder, neck, and cerebral arteries were measured for objective image quality. Subjective image quality of the shoulder and cerebral arteries was also evaluated. For patients undergoing digital subtracted angiography (DSA), diagnostic accuracy of CTA was assessed with DSA as reference standard. RESULTS: The SNRs of the shoulder, neck, and cerebral arteries in group A were higher than those in group B (P < 0.05). The CNRs of the shoulder and neck arteries in group A were higher than those in group B (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in subjective image quality of arteries between group A and group B (P > 0.05). The accuracy was noted as 94.0% (156/166) in group A and 97.1% (134/138) in group B for ≥ 50% stenosis. The accuracy of intracranial arterial stenosis was lower than that of extracranial arterial stenosis in group A. The radiation dose of group A was significantly decreased by 56% than that of group B. CONCLUSION: Head and neck CTA at 70 kVp using 25 mL CM can obtain diagnostic image quality with lower radiation dose while maintaining high accuracy in detecting the arterial stenosis compared with the 100-kVp and 40-mL CM.
Entities:
Keywords:
Angiography; Arterial stenosis; Head and neck; Image quality; Low dose
Authors: Xiao Kun Fang; Qian Qian Ni; U Joseph Schoepf; Chang Sheng Zhou; Guo Zhong Chen; Song Luo; Stephen R Fuller; Carlo N De Cecco; Long Jiang Zhang; Guang Ming Lu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-02-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Matthias S May; Manuel R Kramer; Achim Eller; Wolfgang Wuest; Michael Scharf; Michael Brand; Marc Saake; Bernhard Schmidt; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Jun Huang; Andrew J Degnan; Qi Liu; Zhongzhao Teng; Chen Shi Yue; Jonathan H Gillard; Jian Ping Lu Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-12-23 Impact factor: 3.447
Authors: Charbel Saade; Roger Bourne; Mark Wilkinson; Michael Evanoff; Patrick C Brennan Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2013 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.826
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: H J Barnett; D W Taylor; M Eliasziw; A J Fox; G G Ferguson; R B Haynes; R N Rankin; G P Clagett; V C Hachinski; D L Sackett; K E Thorpe; H E Meldrum; J D Spence Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-11-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Johannes Boos; Patric Kröpil; Rotem S Lanzman; Joel Aissa; Christoph Schleich; Philipp Heusch; Lino M Sawicki; Gerald Antoch; Christoph Thomas Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-03-23 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Robert Forbrig; Lucas L Geyer; Robert Stahl; Jun Thorsteinsdottir; Christian Schichor; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Maximilian Patzig; Moriz Herzberg; Thomas Liebig; Franziska Dorn; Christoph G Trumm Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 5.315