PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 2008Investigative Radiology49 citations

Reduction of Radiation Dose Estimates in Cardiac 64-Slice CT Angiography in Patients After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

View Full Paper
FHFranziska HermannSMStefan MartinoffTMTanja Meyer

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this prospective investigation in patients after bypass graft surgery were (1) to estimate radiation dose for routine bypass graft computed tomography (CT) angiography, (2) to study the impact of anatomically adapted and ECG-controlled tube current modulation on radiation dose estimates, and (3) effects on qualitative and quantitative image quality parameters. METHODS: Radiation dose was estimated for 194 consecutive patients undergoing 64-slice CT angiography (Somatom Sensation 64 Cardiac, Siemens Medical Solutions). The impact of anatomically adapted tube current modulation was studied in 2 consecutive patients groups. Furthermore, the impact of ECG-controlled tube current modulation, applied as indicated, was evaluated in both groups. RESULTS: Mean radiation dose estimate for a 64-slice CT bypass graft study was 18.9 +/- 6.0 mSv (CTDIvol 42.3 +/- 12.9 mGy). The application of anatomically adapted tube current modulation had no effect on dose parameters (CTDIvol 43.3 +/- 13.2 vs. 40.1 +/- 12.1 mGy for those with versus those without anatomically adapted tube current modulation, P = 0.1). Additional implementation of ECG-controlled tube current modulation resulted in reduced dose parameters (CTDIvol of 32.9 +/- 2.6 vs. 58.9 +/- 3.9 mGy and radiation dose estimates: 14.7 +/- 1.9 mSv vs. 26.5 +/- 2.1 mSv for those with versus those without ECG pulsing, both P < 0.01). There was no deterioration in image quality with use of tube current modulation algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: The radiation burden associated with 64-slice bypass graft CT angiographies is substantial. Anatomically adapted tube current modulation does not reduce radiation dose parameters, whereas ECG-controlled tube current modulation was associated with a 45% reduction in dose estimates. Application of both tube current modulation algorithms did not result in reduced image quality.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hermann et al. (2008) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a6ab48778a09e5ab7b38dfahttps://doi.org/10.1097/rli.0b013e318160b3a3
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Multi–Detector Row CT: Radiation Dose Characteristics2003 · 153 citations
  2. 2Low Tube Voltage Improves Computed Tomography Imaging of Delayed Myocardial Contrast Enhancement in an Experimental Acute Myocardial Infarction Model2007 · 77 citations
  3. 3Automatic tube-current modulation in CT—a comparison between different solutions2005 · 33 citations
  4. 4Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation2002 · 616 citations
  5. 5Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions2000 · 230 citations