Cargando…

Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study

BACKGROUND: To investigate the impact of high pitch cardiac CT vs. retrospective ECG gated CT on the quantification of calcified vessel stenoses, with assessment of the influence of tube voltage, reconstruction kernel and heart rate. METHODS: A 4D cardiac movement phantom equipped with three differe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Penzkofer, Tobias, Donandt, Eva, Isfort, Peter, Allmendinger, Thomas, Kuhl, Christiane K, Mahnken, Andreas H, Bruners, Philipp
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25178653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-14-30
_version_ 1782336345349292032
author Penzkofer, Tobias
Donandt, Eva
Isfort, Peter
Allmendinger, Thomas
Kuhl, Christiane K
Mahnken, Andreas H
Bruners, Philipp
author_facet Penzkofer, Tobias
Donandt, Eva
Isfort, Peter
Allmendinger, Thomas
Kuhl, Christiane K
Mahnken, Andreas H
Bruners, Philipp
author_sort Penzkofer, Tobias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To investigate the impact of high pitch cardiac CT vs. retrospective ECG gated CT on the quantification of calcified vessel stenoses, with assessment of the influence of tube voltage, reconstruction kernel and heart rate. METHODS: A 4D cardiac movement phantom equipped with three different plaque phantoms (12.5%, 25% and 50% stenosis at different calcification levels), was scanned with a 128-row dual source CT scanner, applying different trigger types (gated vs. prospectively triggered high pitch), tube voltages (100-120 kV) and heart rates (50–90 beats per minute, bpm). Images were reconstructed using different standard (B26f, B46f, B70f) and iterative (I26f, I70f) convolution kernels. Absolute and relative plaque sizes were measured and statistically compared. Radiation dose associated with the different methods (gated vs. high pitch, 100 kV vs. 120 kV) were compared. RESULTS: Compared to the known diameters of the phantom plaques and vessels both CT-examination techniques overestimated the degrees of stenoses. Using the high pitch CT-protocol plaques appeared larger (0.09 ± 0.31 mm, 2 ± 8 percent points, PP) in comparison to the ECG-gated CT-scans. Reducing tube voltage had a similar effect, resulting in higher grading of the same stenoses by 3 ± 8 PP. In turn, sharper convolution kernels lead to a lower grading of stenoses (differences of up to 5%). Pairwise comparison of B26f and I26f, B46f and B70f, and B70f and I70f showed differences of 0–1 ± 6–8 PP of the plaque depiction. Motion artifacts were present only at 90 bpm high pitch experiments. High-pitch protocols were associated with significantly lower radiation doses compared with the ECG-gated protocols (258.0 mGy vs. 2829.8 mGy CTDI(vol), p ≤ 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Prospectively triggered high-pitch cardiac CT led to an overestimation of plaque diameter and degree of stenoses in a coronary phantom. This overestimation is only slight and probably negligible in a clinical situation. Even at higher heart rates high pitch CT-scanning allowed reliable measurements of plaque and vessel diameters with only slight differences compared ECG-gated protocols, although motion artifacts were present at 90 bpm using the high pitch protocols.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4174388
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41743882014-09-26 Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study Penzkofer, Tobias Donandt, Eva Isfort, Peter Allmendinger, Thomas Kuhl, Christiane K Mahnken, Andreas H Bruners, Philipp BMC Med Imaging Research Article BACKGROUND: To investigate the impact of high pitch cardiac CT vs. retrospective ECG gated CT on the quantification of calcified vessel stenoses, with assessment of the influence of tube voltage, reconstruction kernel and heart rate. METHODS: A 4D cardiac movement phantom equipped with three different plaque phantoms (12.5%, 25% and 50% stenosis at different calcification levels), was scanned with a 128-row dual source CT scanner, applying different trigger types (gated vs. prospectively triggered high pitch), tube voltages (100-120 kV) and heart rates (50–90 beats per minute, bpm). Images were reconstructed using different standard (B26f, B46f, B70f) and iterative (I26f, I70f) convolution kernels. Absolute and relative plaque sizes were measured and statistically compared. Radiation dose associated with the different methods (gated vs. high pitch, 100 kV vs. 120 kV) were compared. RESULTS: Compared to the known diameters of the phantom plaques and vessels both CT-examination techniques overestimated the degrees of stenoses. Using the high pitch CT-protocol plaques appeared larger (0.09 ± 0.31 mm, 2 ± 8 percent points, PP) in comparison to the ECG-gated CT-scans. Reducing tube voltage had a similar effect, resulting in higher grading of the same stenoses by 3 ± 8 PP. In turn, sharper convolution kernels lead to a lower grading of stenoses (differences of up to 5%). Pairwise comparison of B26f and I26f, B46f and B70f, and B70f and I70f showed differences of 0–1 ± 6–8 PP of the plaque depiction. Motion artifacts were present only at 90 bpm high pitch experiments. High-pitch protocols were associated with significantly lower radiation doses compared with the ECG-gated protocols (258.0 mGy vs. 2829.8 mGy CTDI(vol), p ≤ 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Prospectively triggered high-pitch cardiac CT led to an overestimation of plaque diameter and degree of stenoses in a coronary phantom. This overestimation is only slight and probably negligible in a clinical situation. Even at higher heart rates high pitch CT-scanning allowed reliable measurements of plaque and vessel diameters with only slight differences compared ECG-gated protocols, although motion artifacts were present at 90 bpm using the high pitch protocols. BioMed Central 2014-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4174388/ /pubmed/25178653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-14-30 Text en Copyright © 2014 Penzkofer et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Penzkofer, Tobias
Donandt, Eva
Isfort, Peter
Allmendinger, Thomas
Kuhl, Christiane K
Mahnken, Andreas H
Bruners, Philipp
Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title_full Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title_fullStr Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title_full_unstemmed Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title_short Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
title_sort influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25178653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-14-30
work_keys_str_mv AT penzkofertobias influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT donandteva influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT isfortpeter influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT allmendingerthomas influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT kuhlchristianek influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT mahnkenandreash influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy
AT brunersphilipp influenceoftriggertypetubevoltageandheartrateoncalcifiedplaqueimagingindualsourcecardiaccomputedtomographyphantomstudy