Enhancing diagnostic performance and image quality in coronary CT angiography: Impact of SnapShot Freeze 2 algorithm across varied heart rates in stent patients.

Purpose: To investigate the enhancement of image quality achieved through the utilization of SnapShot Freeze 2 (SSF2), a comparison was made against the results obtained from the original SnapShot Freeze algorithm (SSF) and standard motion correction (STND) in stent patients undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA) across the entire range of heart rates. Materials and methods: A total of 118 patients who underwent CCTA, were retrospectively included in this study. Images of these patients were reconstructed using three different algorithms: SSF2, SSF, and STND. Objective assessments include signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR), diameters of stents and artifact index (AI). The image quality was subjectively evaluated by two readers. Results: Compared with SSF and STND, SSF2 had similar or even higher quality in the parameters (AI, SNR, CNR, inner diameters) of coronary artery, stent, myocardium, MV (mitral valve), TV (tricuspid valve), AV (aorta valve), and PV (pulmonary valve), and aortic root (AO). Besides the above structures, SSF2 also demonstrated comparable or even higher subjective scores in atrial septum (AS), ventricular septum (VS), and pulmonary artery root (PA). Furthermore, the enhancement in image quality with SSF2 was significantly greater in the high heart rate group compared to the low heart rate group. Moreover, the improvement in both high and low heart rate groups was better in the SSF2 group compared to the SSF and STND group. Besides, when using the three algorithms, an effect of heart rate variability on stent image quality was not detected. Conclusion: Compared to SSF and STND, SSF2 can enhance the image quality of whole‐heart structures and mitigate artifacts of coronary stents. Furthermore, SSF2 has demonstrated a significant improvement in the image quality for patients with a heart rate equal to or higher than 85 bpm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]