OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a prospective first-pass analysis (FPA) dynamic computed tomography (CT) perfusion technique for accurate low-radiation-dose global stress perfusion measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospective FPA technique was evaluated in 10 swine (42 ± 12 kg) by direct comparison to a previously validated retrospective FPA technique. Of the 10 swine, 3 had intermediate stenoses with fractional flow reserve severities of 0.70 to 0.90. In each swine, contrast and saline were injected peripherally followed by dynamic volume scanning with a 320-slice CT scanner. Specifically, for the reference standard retrospective FPA technique, volume scans were acquired continuously at 100 kVp and 200 mA over 15 to 20 seconds, followed by systematic selection of only 2 volume scans for global perfusion measurement. For the prospective FPA technique, only 2 volume scans were acquired at 100 kVp and 50 mA for global perfusion measurement. All prospective global stress perfusion measurements were then compared with the corresponding reference standard retrospective global stress perfusion measurements through regression analysis. The CTDIvol and size-specific dose estimate of the prospective FPA technique were also determined. RESULTS: All prospective global stress perfusion measurements (PPRO) at 50 mA were in good agreement with the reference standard retrospective global stress perfusion measurements (PREF) at 200 mA (PPRO = 1.07 PREF -0.09, r = 0.94; root-mean-square error = 0.30 mL/min per gram). The CTDIvol and size-specific dose estimate of the prospective FPA technique were 2.3 and 3.7 mGy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate low-radiation-dose global stress perfusion measurement is feasible using a prospective FPA dynamic CT perfusion technique.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a prospective first-pass analysis (FPA) dynamic computed tomography (CT) perfusion technique for accurate low-radiation-dose global stress perfusion measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospective FPA technique was evaluated in 10 swine (42 ± 12 kg) by direct comparison to a previously validated retrospective FPA technique. Of the 10 swine, 3 had intermediate stenoses with fractional flow reserve severities of 0.70 to 0.90. In each swine, contrast and saline were injected peripherally followed by dynamic volume scanning with a 320-slice CT scanner. Specifically, for the reference standard retrospective FPA technique, volume scans were acquired continuously at 100 kVp and 200 mA over 15 to 20 seconds, followed by systematic selection of only 2 volume scans for global perfusion measurement. For the prospective FPA technique, only 2 volume scans were acquired at 100 kVp and 50 mA for global perfusion measurement. All prospective global stress perfusion measurements were then compared with the corresponding reference standard retrospective global stress perfusion measurements through regression analysis. The CTDIvol and size-specific dose estimate of the prospective FPA technique were also determined. RESULTS: All prospective global stress perfusion measurements (PPRO) at 50 mA were in good agreement with the reference standard retrospective global stress perfusion measurements (PREF) at 200 mA (PPRO = 1.07 PREF -0.09, r = 0.94; root-mean-square error = 0.30 mL/min per gram). The CTDIvol and size-specific dose estimate of the prospective FPA technique were 2.3 and 3.7 mGy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate low-radiation-dose global stress perfusion measurement is feasible using a prospective FPA dynamic CT perfusion technique.
Authors: N H Pijls; G J Uijen; A Hoevelaken; T Pijnenburg; K L van Leeuwen; J H Fast; H S Bos; W R Aengevaeren; T van der Werf Journal: Int J Card Imaging Date: 1990
Authors: Johannes Rieber; Armin Huber; Isabelle Erhard; Silvia Mueller; Michael Schweyer; Andreas Koenig; Thomas M Schiele; Karl Theisen; Uwe Siebert; Stefan O Schoenberg; Maximilian Reiser; Volker Klauss Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2006-05-23 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Maria C Ziadi; Robert A Dekemp; Kathryn A Williams; Ann Guo; Benjamin J W Chow; Jennifer M Renaud; Terrence D Ruddy; Niroshi Sarveswaran; Rebecca E Tee; Rob S B Beanlands Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-08-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Amir Pourmorteza; Karl H Schuleri; Daniel A Herzka; Albert C Lardo; Elliot R McVeigh Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Marcus Y Chen; Carlos E Rochitte; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Marc Dewey; Richard T George; Julie M Miller; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Kunihiro Yoshioka; Kakuya Kitagawa; Hajime Sakuma; Roger Laham; Andrea L Vavere; Rodrigo J Cerci; Vishal C Mehra; Cesar Nomura; Klaus F Kofoed; Masahiro Jinzaki; Sachio Kuribayashi; Arthur J Scholte; Michael Laule; Swee Yaw Tan; John Hoe; Narinder Paul; Frank J Rybicki; Jeffrey A Brinker; Andrew E Arai; Matthew B Matheson; Christopher Cox; Melvin E Clouse; Marcelo F Di Carli; João A C Lima Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 11.105