Eriko Maeda1, Go Shirota2, Eisuke Shibata3, Shuhei Komatsu4, Kenji Ino5, Rumiko Torigoe6, Osamu Abe3. 1. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan. NQF38509@nifty.com. 2. Department of Radiology, NTT East Medical Center Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, Tokyo Bay Urayasu Ichikawa Medical Center, Chiba, Japan. 5. Imaging Center, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 6. Canon Medical Systems Corporation, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric cardiac computed tomography (CT) can be acquired without electrode placement by using synthetic electrocardiogram (ECG). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the depiction of gross cardiac structures and coronary arteries in 320-row pediatric CT is not inferior when CT is gated with synthetic ECG at 150 beats per minute (bpm), compared to the patients' own ECG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty 320-row CT examinations performed in children younger than 3 years old with congenital cardiac anomaly were enrolled in this retrospective study. Thirty examinations were scanned using the children's own ECG for gating and 30 examinations were scanned using synthetic ECG at 150 bpm. The image quality was compared between the two gating modes using a 3-point scale to delineate the following anatomical structures: atrial septum, ventricular septum, right atrium, right ventricle, left atrium, left ventricle, main pulmonary artery, ascending aorta, aortic arch including the patent ductus arteriosus, descending aorta, right coronary artery and left main trunk. Beam-hardening artifacts from contrast enhancement material were evaluated using a 3-point scale, and the overall image quality was evaluated using a 5-point scale. RESULTS: Synthetic ECG was not inferior to the patients' ECG in depicting each structure, beam-hardening artifact and overall image quality. Average indices were clinically acceptable imaging quality, except for subjective image quality of mid and distal coronary arteries. CONCLUSION: Pediatric cardiac CT in patients younger than 3 years old can be acquired using synthetic ECG gating, with image quality not inferior to the patients' ECG.
BACKGROUND: Pediatric cardiac computed tomography (CT) can be acquired without electrode placement by using synthetic electrocardiogram (ECG). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the depiction of gross cardiac structures and coronary arteries in 320-row pediatric CT is not inferior when CT is gated with synthetic ECG at 150 beats per minute (bpm), compared to the patients' own ECG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty 320-row CT examinations performed in children younger than 3 years old with congenital cardiac anomaly were enrolled in this retrospective study. Thirty examinations were scanned using the children's own ECG for gating and 30 examinations were scanned using synthetic ECG at 150 bpm. The image quality was compared between the two gating modes using a 3-point scale to delineate the following anatomical structures: atrial septum, ventricular septum, right atrium, right ventricle, left atrium, left ventricle, main pulmonary artery, ascending aorta, aortic arch including the patent ductus arteriosus, descending aorta, right coronary artery and left main trunk. Beam-hardening artifacts from contrast enhancement material were evaluated using a 3-point scale, and the overall image quality was evaluated using a 5-point scale. RESULTS: Synthetic ECG was not inferior to the patients' ECG in depicting each structure, beam-hardening artifact and overall image quality. Average indices were clinically acceptable imaging quality, except for subjective image quality of mid and distal coronary arteries. CONCLUSION: Pediatric cardiac CT in patients younger than 3 years old can be acquired using synthetic ECG gating, with image quality not inferior to the patients' ECG.
Authors: Andrew J Einstein; Carl D Elliston; Andrew E Arai; Marcus Y Chen; Richard Mather; Gregory D N Pearson; Robert L Delapaz; Edward Nickoloff; Ajoy Dutta; David J Brenner Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael A Winkler; Paul F von Herrmann; Michael A Brooks; Charles W Hoopes; Anil Attili; Vincent L Sorrell Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-01-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Faris Al-Mousily; Roger Y Shifrin; Frederick J Fricker; Nicholas Feranec; Nancy S Quinn; Arun Chandran Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2011-01-06 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Marc Saake; Michael M Lell; Oliver Rompel; Martin Gloeckler; Matthias May; Achim Eller; Stephan Achenbach; Michael Uder; Wolfgang Wuest Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2014-05-22