Comparison of Radiation Dose and Image Quality: 320-MDCT Versus 64-MDCT Coronary Angiography

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to compare radiation dose and image quality of 320- and 64-MDCT angiography using prospective gating. MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred seventy-four patients underwent 320-MDCT, and 95 patients underwent 64-MDCT. The scan parameters for 320-MDCT were 120 kVp, 400 mA, and gantry rotation of 350 milliseconds; the parameters for 64-MDCT were 120 kVp, 600 mA, and gantry rotation of 350 milliseconds. Effective dose (ED) was calculated from the dose-length product and a conversion factor (k = 0.014 mSv / mGy × cm). Two observers independently assessed image quality using a 3-point scale, where 3 denotes excellent quality and 1 denotes nondiagnostic quality, using a 16-segment model. Discrepancies were settled by consensus. RESULTS The ED was significantly lower in patients undergoing 320-MDCT angiography, with a median ED of 4.4 mSv (interquartile range [IQR], 3.4–6.2 mSv), compared with 64-MDCT angiography, with a median ED of 6.2 mSv (IQR, 5.5–6.9 mSv) (p = 0.0001). In patients with a heart rate of 65 beats/min or less (92%), the median radiation dose using 320-MDCT was 4.1 mSv (IQR, 3.2–6.1 mSv), and that for 64-MDCT angiography was 6.2 mSv (IQR, 5.8–6.9 mSv) (p = 0.0001). In patients with heart rate greater than 65 beats/min (8%), the median dose was higher with 320-MDCT (8.7 mSv; IQR, 5.9–14.3 mSv) than with 64-MDCT (5.8 mSv; IQR, 5.3–6.7 mSv) (p = 0.02). Segmental image quality was significantly better for 320-MDCT (excellent or good quality, 96.66%; nondiagnostic quality, 0.1%) than for 64-MDCT angiography (excellent or good quality, 86%; nondiagnostic quality, 3.33%) (all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Image quality was good for both 320- and 64-MDCT angiography. Overall radiation dose was significantly lower in 320-MDCT angiography when the heart rate was 65 beats/min or less. Every effort should be made to control heart rate to minimize radiation dose.

A comparison of bolus injection of landiolol versus oral administration of propranolol before cardiac computed tomography

“…(Leschka et al 2006; Shim et al 2005; Muenzel et al 2011; Korosoglou et al 2010; Khan et al 2011). We compared a single bolus injection of landiolol with oral administration of propranolol, and demonstrated a significantly greater decrease of HR in the propranolol group without improvement of image quality.…”

Coronary calcium scoring and computed tomography angiography

“…The prospective multicenter ACCURACY trial [2], which included 230 participants with intermediate prevalence of CAD who underwent 64-slice coronary CCTA and ICA, reported very high diagnostic accuracy for CCTA as compared with ICA in the diagnosis of coronary artery stenosis. These scanners have improved image quality [41,42], although diagnostic accuracy is similar to that of 64-slice CCTA [43,44]. For 70% stenosis, sensitivity was 94%, specificity was 83%, PPV was 48%, and NPV was 99%.…”

The Use of Facial CT for the Evaluation of a Suspected Simple Dentoalveolar Abscess in the Emergency Department

“…Effective radiation dose (mSv) was estimated by multiplying DLP collected from the CT scanner with the standard conversion coefficient (K) (K = 0.0021 mSv/mGy x cm). 4,5 The DLP varied amongst our population based on the number of slices necessary to include the region of interest in different sized patients.…”