Retrospective study reveals lower radiation dose and image noise with wide-area detector CT versus dual-source CT in emergency patients, highlighting platform-specific trade-offs for acute chest pain.
Background/Objectives: Single-pass triple-rule-out computed tomography (CT) angiography (TRO-CTA) must compromise among differing pulmonary, coronary, and aortic contrast-transit times. Wide-area detector CT (WAD-CT) and dual-source CT (DSCT) offer different coverage, temporal resolution, and dose profiles, but direct comparative evidence for a sequential single-bolus strategy is limited in selected emergency patients with overlapping concern for acute coronary syndrome, pulmonary embolism, or acute aortic syndrome. We compared territory-specific image quality and radiation dose; diagnostic accuracy was not assessed. Methods: This retrospective study included 114 adults (WAD-CT, n = 60; DSCT, n = 54). After test-bolus timing, one weight-based diagnostic bolus was used for sequential pulmonary, electrocardiography-synchronized coronary, and non-gated aortic acquisitions. Attenuation, noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), blinded dual-reader quality scores, and radiation dose were compared by territory. Results: Mean overall scores across the two readers were ≥3 for every examination in all phases. WAD-CT showed higher pulmonary trunk SNR (19.5 ± 8.9 vs. 14.3 ± 3.8; p = 0.002), higher ascending aortic SNR (24.9 ± 11.4 vs. 14.2 ± 3.0; p < 0.001), lower coronary and aortic noise, and 38.1% lower total estimated dose (6.40 ± 1.72 vs. 10.34 ± 6.91 mSv; p < 0.001). DSCT showed higher right coronary attenuation (671.8 ± 186.7 vs. 466.4 ± 128.9 Hounsfield units; p < 0.001), no significant difference in right coronary SNR (p = 0.681), and less aortic-root pulsation artifact (p < 0.001). Pulmonary- and coronary-phase overall scores were comparable. Conclusions: Both protocols provided acceptable territory-level image quality from one diagnostic bolus. WAD-CT provided lower coronary and aortic noise and estimated radiation dose, whereas DSCT provided higher coronary attenuation and less aortic-root pulsation artifact. Diagnostic accuracy and performance in subsegmental pulmonary arteries and distal or small coronary branches remain unestablished.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: