nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.08.2019 | CARDIAC RADIOLOGY

Radiation exposure related to cardiovascular CT examination: comparison between conventional 64-MDCT and third-generation dual-source MDCT

verfasst von: Giacomo Agliata, Nicolò Schicchi, Andrea Agostini, Marco Fogante, Alberto Mari, Stefania Maggi, Andrea Giovagnoni

Erschienen in: La radiologia medica | Ausgabe 8/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To compare radiation exposure associated with daily practice cardiovascular (CV) examinations performed on two different multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners, a conventional 64-MDCT and a third-generation dual-source (DS) MDCT.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective study, 1458 patients who underwent CV examinations between January 2017 and August 2018 were enrolled. A single-source 64-MDCT (Lightspeed VCT, GE) scan was performed in 705 patients from January to August 2017 (207 coronary examinations and 498 vascular examinations) and 753 patients underwent third-generation 192 × 2-DSCT (Somatom FORCE, Siemens) scan from January to August 2018 (302 coronary examinations and 451 vascular examinations). Volume CT dose index (CTDI_vol), dose length product (DLP), effective dose (ED), tube voltage (TV) and exposure time (ET), pitch factor (PF) were registered for each patient. Student’s t test was used to compare mean values between each corresponding group of MDCT and DSCT.

Results

In coronary examinations with DSCT, CTDI_vol was 24.4% lower (23.1 mGy vs 30.6 mGy, p < 0.0001) and DLP and ED reductions were 35.6% than with MDCT (465.0 mGy * cm vs 732.3 mGy * cm and 6.5 mSv and 10.3 mSv; vs p < 0.0001). Concerning scan parameters, kVp and ET reductions were 12.7% and 69.4%, respectively (p < 0.0001); PF increase was 73.8% (p < 0.0001). In all vascular studies, DSCT, compared with MDCT, permitted to reduce CTDI_vol from 43.5 to 70.6%; DLP and ED reductions were from 50.3 to 73.1%; kVp and ET decreases were from 10.7 to 32.5% and from 26.3 to 68.7%. PF increase was from 16.7 to 58.1% (all differences with p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

In daily practice, CV examinations CTDI, DLP, ED, ET and TV were lower and PF was higher with 192 × 2-DSCT compared to 64-MDCT.

Sun Z, Mwipatayi BP, Allen YB, Hartley DE, LawrenceBrown MM (2009) Multislice CT angiography of fenestrated endovascular stent grafting for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms: a pictorial review of the 2D/3D visualizations. Korean J Radiol 10:285–293CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Castañer E, Andreu M, Gallardo X, Mata JM, Cabezuelo MA, Pallardó Y (2003) CT in nontraumatic acute thoracic aortic disease: typical and atypical features and complications. Radiographics 23:S93–110CrossRefPubMed

Sebastià C, Pallisa E, Quiroga S, Alvarez-Castells A, Dominguez R, Evangelista A (1999) Aortic dissection: diagnosis and follow-up with helical CT. Radiographics 19:45–60CrossRefPubMed

Schoepf UJ, Goldhaber SZ, Costello P (2004) Spiral computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 109:2160–2167CrossRefPubMed

Perrier A, Roy PM, Sanchez O, Le Gal G, Meyer G, Gourdier AL, Furber A, Revel MP, Howarth N, Davido A, Bounameaux H (2005) Multidetector-row computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 352:1760–1768CrossRefPubMed

Rozenblit AM, Patlas M, Rosenbaum AT, Okhi T, Veith FJ, Laks MP, Ricci ZJ (2003) Detection of endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: value of unenhanced and delayed helical CT acquisitions. Radiology 227:426–433CrossRefPubMed

Armerding MD, Rubin GD, Beaulieu CF, Slonim SM, Olcott EW, Samuels SL, Jorgensen MJ, Semba CP, Jeffrey RB Jr, Dake MD (2000) Aortic aneurysmal disease: assessment of stent-graft treatment-CT versus conventional angiography. Radiology 215:138–146CrossRefPubMed

Stavropoulos SW, Clark TW, Carpenter JP, Fairman RM, Litt H, Velazquez OC, Insko E, Farner M, Baum RA (2005) Use of CT angiography to classify endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Interv Radiol 16:663–667CrossRefPubMed

Sun Z (2003) Helical CT angiography of abdominal aortic aneurysms treated with suprarenal stent grafting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 26:290–295CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rydberg J, Kopecky KK, Lalka SG, Johnson MS, Dalsing MC, Persohn SA (2001) Stent grafting of abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre-and postoperative evaluation with multislice helical CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 25:580–586CrossRefPubMed

11.

Sun Z, Jiang W (2006) Diagnostic value of multislice computed tomography angiography in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 60:279–286CrossRefPubMed

12.

Sun Z, Lin C, Davidson R, Dong C, Liao Y (2008) Diagnostic value of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 67:78–84CrossRefPubMed

13.

Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, Decramer I, Van Hoe LR, Wijns W, Hunink MG (2007) Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology 244:419–428CrossRefPubMed

14.

Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, Christensen E, Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C (2007) 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 28:3042–3050CrossRefPubMed

15.

Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD (2008) 64-Slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 121:715–725CrossRefPubMed

16.

Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, Walker S, Fraser C, Jia X, Waugh N (2008) 64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 94:1386–1393CrossRefPubMed

17.

Sun Z (2012) Cardiac CT imaging in coronary artery disease: current status and future directions. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2:98–105PubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Sun Z, Choo GH, Ng KH (2012) Coronary CT angiography: current status and continuing challenges. Br J Radiol 85:495–510CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Guo SL, Guo YM, Zhai YN, Ma B, Wang P, Yang KH (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of first generation dual-source computed tomography in the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis from 24 studies. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 27:755–771CrossRefPubMed

20.

Pelliccia F, Pasceri V, Evangelista A, Pergolini A, Barillà F, Viceconte N, Tanzilli G, Schiariti M, Greco C, Gaudio C (2013) Diagnostic accuracy of 320-row computed tomography as compared with invasive coronary angiography in unselected, consecutive patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29:443–452CrossRefPubMed

21.

Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP (2004) Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 231:393–398CrossRefPubMed

22.

Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S (2007) Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 298:317–323CrossRefPubMed

23.

Alkadhi H, Leschka S (2011) Radiation dose of cardiac computed tomography—what has been achieved and what needs to be done. Eur Radiol 21:505–509CrossRefPubMed

24.

Stocker TJ et al (2018) Reduction in radiation exposure in cardiovascular computed tomography imaging: results from the PROspective multicenter registry on radiaTion dose Estimates of cardiac CT angIOgraphy iN daily practice in 2017 (PROTECTION VI). Eur Heart J 39(41):3715–3723CrossRefPubMed

25.

Petersilka M, Bruder H, Krauss B, Stierstorfer K, Flohr TG (2008) Technical principles of dual source CT. Eur J Radiol 68:362–368CrossRefPubMed

26.

Alkadhi H, Stolzmann P, Desbiolles L et al (2010) Low-dose, 128-slice, dual-source CT coronary angiography: accuracy and radiation dose of the high-pitch and the step-and-shoot mode. Heart 96:933–938CrossRefPubMed

27.

Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D et al (2010) Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 msv using prospectively electrocardiogramtriggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J 31:340–346CrossRefPubMed

28.

Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Desbiolles L et al (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of high-pitch dual-source CT for the assessment of coronary stenoses: first experience. Eur Radiol 19:2896–2903CrossRefPubMed

29.

Achenbach S, Goroll T, Seltmann M et al (2011) Detection of coronary artery stenoses by low-dose, prospectively ECG-triggered, high-pitch spiral coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4:328–337CrossRefPubMed

30.

Lell M, Marwan M, Schepis T et al (2009) Prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition for coronary CT angiography using dual source CT: technique and initial experience. Eur Radiol 19:2576–2583CrossRefPubMed

31.

Apfaltrer G et al (2017) Impact on image quality and radiation dose of third-generation dual-source computed tomography of the coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 119:1156–1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.12.028 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Linsen PMV et al (2016) Computed tomography angiography with a 192-slice dual-source computed tomography system: improvements in image quality and radiation dose. J Clin Imaging Sci 6:44CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Morsbach F, Gordic S, Desbiolles L, Husarik D, Frauenfelder T, Schmidt B et al (2014) Performance of turbo high-pitch dual-source CT for coronary CT angiography: first ex vivo and patient experience. Eur Radiol 24:1889–1895CrossRefPubMed

34.

De Zordo T, von Lutterotti K, Dejaco C et al (2012) Comparison of image quality and radiation dose of different pulmonary CTA protocols on a 128-slice CT: high-pitch dual source CT, dual energy CT and conventional spiral CT. Eur Radiol 22:279–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2251-y CrossRefPubMed

35.

American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2008) The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT Report of AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee

36.

Meyer M et al (2017) Radiation dose levels of retrospectively ECG-gated coronary CT angiography using 70-kVp tube voltage in patients with high or irregular heart rates. Acad Radiol 24:30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.08.004 CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Radiation exposure related to cardiovascular CT examination: comparison between conventional 64-MDCT and third-generation dual-source MDCT
verfasst von: Giacomo Agliata
Nicolò Schicchi
Andrea Agostini
Marco Fogante
Alberto Mari
Stefania Maggi
Andrea Giovagnoni
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2019
Verlag: Springer Milan
Erschienen in: La radiologia medica / Ausgabe 8/2019
Print ISSN: 0033-8362
Elektronische ISSN: 1826-6983
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-019-01036-6

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Radiation exposure related to cardiovascular CT examination: comparison between conventional 64-MDCT and third-generation dual-source MDCT