1.
Husmann L.
Herzog A.
Burkhard N,
et al.
Body physique and heart rate variability determine the occurrence of stair-step artefacts in 64-slice CT coronary angiography with prospective ECG-triggering,
Eur Radiol 2009;19:1698-1703.
2.
Raff GL,
Gallagher MJ,
O'Neill WW,
et al.
Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography.
Journal of the American college of Cardiology 2005;46(3):552-557.
3.
Maruyama T,
Takada M,
Hasuike T,
et al.
Radiation dose reduction and coronary assessability of prospective electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography coronary angiography.
Journal of the American college of Cardiology 2008;52(18):1450-5.
4.
Sun Z,
Nq KH.
Prospective versus retrospective ECG-gated multislice CT coronary angiography:A systematic review of radiation dose and diagnostic accuracy,
Eur Radiol 2012;81(2):e94-100.
5.
Kroft LJ,
de Roos A,
Geleijns J.
Artifacts in ECG-Synchronized MDCT Coronary Angiography.
AJR 2007;189(3):581-591.
6.
Hirai N,
Horiguchi J,
Fujioka C,
et al.
Prospective versus retrospective ECG-gated 64-detector coronary CT angiography: assessment of image quality,
stenosis,
and radiation dose.
Radiology 2008;248(2):424-430.
7.
Kimura F,
Umezawa T,
Asano T,
et al.
Coronary computed tomography angiography using prospective electrocardiography-gated axial scans with 64-detector computed tomography: evaluation of stair-step artifacts and padding time.
Jpn J Radiol 2010;28(6):437-445.
8.
Hsieh J,
Londt J,
Vass M,
et al.
Step-and-shoot data acquisition and reconstruction for cardiac x-ray computed tomography.
Med Phys 2006;33(11):4236-4248.
9.
Singh A,
Sethi Y,
Watkins S,
et al.
Banding and Step-Stair Artifacts on the Cardiac-CT Caused By Pseudo-Ectopic Beats,
Journal of Radiology Case Reports 2009;3(6):3-8.
10.
Leschka S,
Wildermuth S,
Boehm T et al.
Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality.
Radiology 2006;241:378–385.