Back to Search Start Over

Reduced iodine load with CT coronary angiography using dual-energy imaging: A prospective randomized trial compared with standard coronary CT angiography.

Authors :
Raju, Rekha
Thompson, Angus G.
Lee, Kristy
Precious, Bruce
Tae-Hyun Yang
Berger, Adam
Taylor, Carolyn
Heilbron, Brett
Giang Nguyen
Earls, James
Min, James
Carrascosa, Patricia
Murphy, Darra
Hague, Cameron
Leipsic, Jonathon A.
Source :
Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography; Jul2014, Vol. 8 Issue 4, p282-288, 7p
Publication Year :
2014

Abstract

Background There is concern regarding the administration of iodinated contrast to patients with impaired renal function because of the increased risk of contrast-induced nephropathy. Objective Evaluate image quality and feasibility of a protocol with a reduced volume of iodinated contrast and utilization of dual-energy coronary CT angiography (DECT) vs a standard iodinated contrast volume coronary CT angiography protocol (SCCTA). Methods A total of 102 consecutive patients were randomized to SCCTA (n = 53) or DECT with rapid kVp switching (n = 49). Eighty milliliters and 35 mL of iodinated contrast were administered in the SCCTA and DECT cohorts, respectively. Two readers measured signal and noise in the coronary arteries; signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. A 5-point signal/noise Likert scale was used to evaluate image quality; scores of <3 were nondiagnostic. Agreement was assessed through kappa analyses. Results Demographics and radiation dose were not significantly different; there was no difference in CNR between both cohorts (P = .95). A significant difference in SNR between the groups (P = .02) lost significance (P = .13) when adjusted for body mass index. The median Likert score was inferior for DECT for reader 1 (3.6 ± 0.6 vs 4.3 ± 0.6; P < .001) but not reader 2 (4.1 ± 0.6 vs 4.3 ± 0.5; P = .06). Agreement in diagnostic interpretability in the DECT and SCCTA groups was 91% (95% confidence interval, 86%-100%) and 96% (95% confidence interval, 90%-100%), respectively. Conclusion DECT resulted in inferior image quality scores but demonstrated comparable SNR, CNR, and rate of diagnostic interpretability without a radiation dose penalty while allowing for >50% reduction in contrast volume compared with SCCTA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
19345925
Volume :
8
Issue :
4
Database :
Supplemental Index
Journal :
Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
97629603
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2014.06.003