Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Seminars in Cardiovascular Medicine

The Journal of Lithuanian Heart Association

1 Issue per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
1822-7767
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Comparison of retrospectively ECG-gated coronary computed tomography with and without adaptive tube voltage, tube current parameters and individualized contrast media injection protocol to reduce ionizing radiation dose

Mindaugas Matačiūnas
  • Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University
  • Centre of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Vilnius University Hospital Santariškiu Klinikos
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Kristina Kristinaitytė / Birutė Gricienė
  • Department of Clinical Radiation Monitoring, Vilnius University Hospital Santariškiu Klinikos
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Algirdas Tamošiūnas
  • Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University
  • Centre of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Vilnius University Hospital Santariškiu Klinikos
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Aleksandras Laucevičius
  • Clinic of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University
  • Centre of Cardiology and Angiology, Vilnius University Hospital Santariškiu Klinikos
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2012-07-20 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10287-012-0005-1

Comparison of retrospectively ECG-gated coronary computed tomography with and without adaptive tube voltage, tube current parameters and individualized contrast media injection protocol to reduce ionizing radiation dose

Objective: The aim of the study was to estimate the decrease in ionizing radiation exposure dose using adaptive tube voltage, tube current parameters and individualized contrast media injection protocol compared to basic retrospectively ECG-gated CCTA protocol and to compare image quality.

Methods: This retrospective study consisted of 30 consecutive patients who had body mass index (BMI) between 25 kg/m2 and 30 kg/m2 and underwent retrospectively ECG-gated CCTA. We have enrolled 15 patients which were scanned with an adaptive tube voltage, tube current and an individualized contrast media injection protocol (study group), the other 15 patients underwent basic retrospectively ECG-gated CCTA protocol (control group). Comparison of ionizing radiation effective dose, subjective and objective image quality was accomplished. Differences in ionizing radiation effective dose were deemed statistically significant if p < 0.01, for other variables we considered a p value of less than 0.05 to be statistically significant.

Results: he difference of a mean effective dose between study and control groups was statistically significant (6.39 ± 0.88 mSv and 17.44 ± 2.45 mSv, p < 0.01). Despite significantly higher image noise, significantly lower contrast-to-noise ratio and signal-to-noise ratio in a study group, both groups showed comparable average image quality (62.03±16.85 and 39.98±8.79, p < 0.01; 5.16±2.03 and 7.71±1.28, p < 0.01; 3 (2.5-3) and 2.75 (2.75-3), p = 0.95).

Conclusions: Despite higher image noise compared to basic retrospectively ECG-gated CCTA protocol, adaptive tube voltage, tube current parameters and individualized contrast media injection protocol allows substantial reduction in ionizing radiation exposure dose to a patient (up to 63%) with an adequate image quality for the evaluation of coronary arteries.

Keywords: ionizing radiation; coronary computed tomographic angiography; effective dose; adaptive tube voltage; individualized contrast media injection

  • Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H, Gaemperli O, Leschka S, Valenta I et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad Radiol 2008; 15:452-461.Web of SciencePubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, Runza G, McFadden EP, Baks T et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005; 112:2318-2323.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:552-557.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, Vachenauer R, Desbiolles L, Gaemperli O et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: First experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:2739-2747.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Raff GL, Chinnaiyan KM, Share DA, Goraya TY, Kazerooni EA, Moscucci M et al. Radiation dose from cardiac computed tomography before and after implementation of radiation dose-reduction techniques. JAMA 2009; 301:2340-2348.Google Scholar

  • Husmann L, Herzog BA, Burkhard N, Valenta I, Burger IA, Gaemperli O et al. Low-dose coronary CT angiography with prospective ECG triggering: validation of a contrast material protocol adapted to body mass index. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193:802-806.Google Scholar

  • Pazhenkottil AP, Husmann L, Buechel RR, Herzog BA, Nkoulou R, Burger IA et al. Validation of a new contrast material protocol adapted to body surface area for optimized low-dose CT coronary angiography with prospective ECG-triggering. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010; 26:591-597.Google Scholar

  • Tatsugami F, Husmann L, Herzog BA, Burkhard N, Valenta I, Gaemperli O et al. Evaluation of a body mass index-adapted protocol for low-dose 64-MDCT coronary angiography with prospective ECG triggering. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192:635-638.Google Scholar

  • Bischoff B, Hein F, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Martinoff S, Schomig A et al. Impact of a reduced tube voltage on CT angiography and radiation dose: results of the PROTECTION I study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 2:940-946.PubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, Cerqueira MD, Henzlova MJ. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation 2007; 116:1290-1305.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Pflederer T, Rudofsky L, Ropers D, Bachmann S, Marwan M, Daniel WG et al. Image quality in a low radiation exposure protocol for retrospectively ECG-gated coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192:1045-1050.Google Scholar

  • Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Huber E, Zankl M, Martinoff S et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006; 113:1305-1310.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Blankstein R, Bolen MA, Pale R, Murphy MK, Shah AB, Bezerra HG et al. Use of 100 kV versus 120 kV in cardiac dual source computed tomography: effect on radiation dose and image quality. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011; 27:579-586.Google Scholar

  • Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O'Gara P et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 Appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010; 4:407-433.Google Scholar

  • Budoff M. Maximizing dose reductions with cardiac CT. The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging (formerly Cardiac Imaging) 2009; 25:279-287.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, Adda O, Treyer V, Wyss CA et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J 2008; 29:191-197.Google Scholar

  • Husmann L, Alkadhi H, Boehm T, Leschka S, Schepis T, Koepfli P et al. Influence of cardiac hemodynamic parameters on coronary artery opacification with 64-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1111-1116.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Herzog BA, Husmann L, Valenta I, Tay FM, Burkhard N, Gaemperli O et al. Determinants of vessel contrast in BMI-adapted low dose CT coronary angiography with prospective ECG-triggering. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 25:625-630.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Kroft LJ, de RA, Geleijns J. Artifacts in ECG-synchronized MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:581-591.Google Scholar

  • Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, Desbiolles L, Grunenfelder J, Marincek B et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005; 26:1482-1487.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article


Published Online: 2012-07-20

Published in Print: 2012-01-01


Citation Information: Seminars in Cardiovascular Medicine, ISSN (Online) 1822-7767, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10287-012-0005-1.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in