Does a standardized cardiac CT angiography protocol provide high-quality imaging with low radiation exposure in an asymptomatic epidemiology cohort?
A standardized cardiac CTA protocol in an epidemiological cohort of asymptomatic men achieved high diagnostic quality in 98.6% of cases with a low average radiation exposure of 2.5 mSv.
OBJECTIVE: The methodology for use of cardiac CT angiography (CTA) in low risk populations is not well defined. In order to present a reference for future studies, we present CTA methodology that is being used in an epidemiology study- the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS). METHODS: The Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) is an on-going multicenter prospective, observational cohort study. The MACS Cardiovascular Disease substudy plans to enroll 800 men (n= 575 HIV seropositive and n=225 HIV seronegative) age 40-70 years for coronary atherosclerosis imaging using cardiac CTA. The protocol includes heart rate (HR) optimization with beta- blockers; use of proper field of view; scan length limitation; prospective ECG-gating using the lowest beam voltage possible. All scans are evaluated for presence, extent, and composition of coronary atherosclerosis, left atrial volumes, left ventricular volume and mass and non-coronary cardiac pathology. RESULTS: The first 498 participants had an average radiation dose of 2.5±1.6 milliSieverts (mSv) for the cardiac CTA study. Overall quality of scans was fair to excellent in 98.6% of studies. There were three significant adverse events-two allergic reactions to contrast and one subcutaneous contrast extravasation. CONCLUSION: Cardiac CTA was safe and afforded a low effective radiation exposure to these asymptomatic research participants and provides valuable cardiovascular endpoints for scientific analysis. The cardiac CTA methodology described here may serve as a reference for use in future epidemiology studies aiming to assess coronary atherosclerosis and cardiac anatomy in low risk populations while minimizing radiation exposure.
Hacioglu et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: