Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
Photon-Counting Versus Dual-Source CT for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Planning.
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
- Author(s): Dirrichs, Timm; Schröder, Jörg; Frick, Michael; Huppertz, Marc; Iwa, Roman; Allmendinger, Thomas; Mecking, Ines; Kuhl, Christiane K.
- Source:
Academic Radiology; Dec2024, Vol. 31 Issue 12, p4780-4789, 10p
- Additional Information
- Abstract:
Cardiovascular CT is required for planning transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). To compare image quality, suitability for TAVI planning, and radiation dose of photon-counting CT (PCCT) with that of dual-source CT (DSCT). Retrospective study on consecutive TAVI candidates with aortic valve stenosis who underwent contrast-enhanced aorto-ilio-femoral PCCT and/or DSCT between 01/2022 and 07/2023. Signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated by standardized ROI analysis. Image quality and suitability for TAVI planning were assessed by four independent expert readers (two cardiac radiologists, two cardiologists) on a 5-point-scale. CT dose index (CTDI) and dose-length-product (DLP) were used to calculate effective radiation dose (eRD). 300 patients (136 female, median age: 81 years, IQR: 76–84) underwent 302 CT examinations, with PCCT in 202, DSCT in 100; two patients underwent both. Although SNR and CNR were significantly lower in PCCT vs. DSCT images (33.0 ± 10.5 vs. 47.3 ± 16.4 and 47.3 ± 14.8 vs. 59.3 ± 21.9, P <.001, respectively), visual image quality was higher in PCCT vs. DSCT (4.8 vs. 3.3, P <.001), with moderate overall interreader agreement among radiologists and among cardiologists (κ = 0.60, respectively). Image quality was rated as "excellent" in 160/202 (79.2%) of PCCT vs. 5/100 (5%) of DSCT cases. Readers found images suitable to depict the aortic valve hinge points and to map the femoral access path in 99% of PCCT vs. 85% of DSCT (P < 0.01), with suitability ranked significantly higher in PCCT vs. DSCT (4.8 vs. 3.3, P <.001). Mean CTDI and DLP, and thus eRD, were significantly lower for PCCT vs. DSCT (22.4 vs. 62.9; 519.4 vs. 895.5, and 8.8 ± 4.5 mSv vs. 15.3 ± 5.8 mSv; all P <.001). PCCT improves image quality, effectively avoids non-diagnostic CT imaging for TAVI planning, and is associated with a lower radiation dose compared to state-of-the-art DSCT. Radiologists and cardiologists found PCCT images more suitable for TAVI planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Abstract:
Copyright of Academic Radiology is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
No Comments.