ECR 2015 / B-0269
CT coronary angiography with iterative image reconstruction and low iodine (270mgI/mL) concentration: comparison of image quality and injection pressure with standard (320mgI/mL) iodine concentration
This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Cardiac, CT-Angiography, Contrast agent-intravenous, Arteriosclerosis
Authors:
L. Faggioni, M. Gabelloni, E. Galati, M. Bianchi, P. Marraccini, E. Neri, C. Bartolozzi; Pisa/IT
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2015/B-0269
Methods and materials
- Seventy-three nonobese patients (body mass index <30kg/m2) underwent CTCA on a high definition 64-row CT scanner (CT750 HD,
General Electric,
Milwaukee,
WI).
Out of them,
in 38 patients (52%) 80-90 of iodixanol 270mgI/mL were injected intravenously at 6.7mL/s flow rate, while in the remaining 35 (48%) the same volume of iodixanol 320mgI/mL was administered at 5.6mL/s flow rate,
thus ensuring an iodine delivery rate of 1.8gI/s in all cases ( Table 1 ). CM injection was followed by administration of 40mL of saline flush at the same flow rate to achieve optimal bolus compaction and clearance of the venous line.
- All CTCA studies were performed using a tube voltage of 100kV,
prospective or retrospective ECG-gating depending on heart rate being <70bpm (48/73 patients, 65.7%) or ≥70bpm (25/73 patients,
34.3%) and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (ASIR™,
General Electric) ( Table 2 ). Patients with heart rate exceeding 80bpm after intravenous administration of beta-blockers immediately prior to CTCA were excluded from the study.
- CM injection was performed using a dual head automated power injector,
and CM injection pressure (expressed in psi) was recorded using an integrated contrast monitoring system (Certegra™,
Bayer Healthcare,
Leverkusen,
Germany) connected to a dedicated remote server, as well as to our institutional PACS.
- Circular regions of interest were placed at the origin of the main coronary arteries ( Fig. 1 ),
and intracoronary density and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were recorded.
- Diagnostic image quality was rated visually by two independent readers using a semiquantitative score (1=nondiagnostic,
2=adequate,
3=excellent).