Michael Messerli1, Patricia Dewes2, Jan-Erik Scholtz3, Christophe Arendt2, Simon Wildermuth4, Thomas J Vogl2, Ralf W Bauer5. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiac Imaging, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Clinic of the Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 3. Massachusetts General Hospital, Cardiac CT PET MRI Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Clinic of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 5. RNS Gemeinschaftspraxis GbR, Atle Schmelze 20, 65201, Wiesbaden, Germany. ralfwbauer@aol.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of an adaptive detector collimation on the dose parameters and accurateness of scan length adaption at prospectively ECG-triggered sequential cardiac CT with a wide-detector third-generation dual-source CT. METHODS: Ideal scan lengths for human hearts were retrospectively derived from 103 triple-rule-out examinations. These measures were entered into the new scanner operated in prospectively ECG-triggered sequential cardiac scan mode with three different detector settings: (1) adaptive collimation, (2) fixed 64 × 0.6-mm collimation, and (3) fixed 96 × 0.6-mm collimation. Differences in effective scan length and deviation from the ideal scan length and dose parameters (CTDIvol, DLP) were documented. RESULTS: The ideal cardiac scan length could be matched by the adaptive collimation in every case while the mean scanned length was longer by 15.4% with the 64 × 0.6 mm and by 27.2% with the fixed 96 × 0.6-mm collimation. While the DLP was almost identical between the adaptive and the 64 × 0.6-mm collimation (83 vs. 89 mGycm at 120 kV), it was 62.7% higher with the 96 × 0.6-mm collimation (135 mGycm), p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: The adaptive detector collimation for prospectively ECG-triggered sequential acquisition allows for adjusting the scan length as accurate as this can only be achieved with a spiral acquisition. This technique allows keeping patient exposure low where patient dose would significantly increase with the traditional step-and-shoot mode. KEY POINTS: • Adaptive detector collimation allows keeping patient exposure low in cardiac CT. • With novel detectors the desired scan length can be accurately matched. • Differences in detector settings may cause 62.7% of excessive dose.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of an adaptive detector collimation on the dose parameters and accurateness of scan length adaption at prospectively ECG-triggered sequential cardiac CT with a wide-detector third-generation dual-source CT. METHODS: Ideal scan lengths for human hearts were retrospectively derived from 103 triple-rule-out examinations. These measures were entered into the new scanner operated in prospectively ECG-triggered sequential cardiac scan mode with three different detector settings: (1) adaptive collimation, (2) fixed 64 × 0.6-mm collimation, and (3) fixed 96 × 0.6-mm collimation. Differences in effective scan length and deviation from the ideal scan length and dose parameters (CTDIvol, DLP) were documented. RESULTS: The ideal cardiac scan length could be matched by the adaptive collimation in every case while the mean scanned length was longer by 15.4% with the 64 × 0.6 mm and by 27.2% with the fixed 96 × 0.6-mm collimation. While the DLP was almost identical between the adaptive and the 64 × 0.6-mm collimation (83 vs. 89 mGycm at 120 kV), it was 62.7% higher with the 96 × 0.6-mm collimation (135 mGycm), p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: The adaptive detector collimation for prospectively ECG-triggered sequential acquisition allows for adjusting the scan length as accurate as this can only be achieved with a spiral acquisition. This technique allows keeping patient exposure low where patient dose would significantly increase with the traditional step-and-shoot mode. KEY POINTS: • Adaptive detector collimation allows keeping patient exposure low in cardiac CT. • With novel detectors the desired scan length can be accurately matched. • Differences in detector settings may cause 62.7% of excessive dose.
Authors: Armin M Huber; Vivian Leber; Bettina M Gramer; Daniela Muenzel; Alexander Leber; Johannes Rieber; Martin Schmidt; Mani Vembar; Ellen Hoffmann; Ernst Rummeny Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-06-20 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Carlos E Rochitte; Richard T George; Marcus Y Chen; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Marc Dewey; Julie M Miller; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Kunihiro Yoshioka; Kakuya Kitagawa; Shiro Nakamori; Roger Laham; Andrea L Vavere; Rodrigo J Cerci; Vishal C Mehra; Cesar Nomura; Klaus F Kofoed; Masahiro Jinzaki; Sachio Kuribayashi; Albert de Roos; Michael Laule; Swee Yaw Tan; John Hoe; Narinder Paul; Frank J Rybicki; Jeffery A Brinker; Andrew E Arai; Christopher Cox; Melvin E Clouse; Marcelo F Di Carli; Joao A C Lima Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2013-11-19 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Martin Greif; Franz von Ziegler; Fabian Bamberg; Janine Tittus; Florian Schwarz; Melvin D'Anastasi; Roy P Marcus; Jan Schenzle; Christoph Becker; Konstantin Nikolaou; Alexander Becker Journal: Heart Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Ravi K Sharma; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Satoru Kishi; Marcus Y Chen; Tiago A Magalhães; Richard T George; Marc Dewey; Frank J Rybicki; Klaus F Kofoed; Albert de Roos; Swee Yaw Tan; Matthew Matheson; Andrea Vavere; Christopher Cox; Melvin E Clouse; Julie M Miller; Jeffery A Brinker; Andrew E Arai; Marcelo F Di Carli; Carlos E Rochitte; Joao A C Lima Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 4.164