Radiation exposure related to cardiovascular CT examination: comparison between conventional 64-MDCT and third-generation dual-source MDCT.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Springer Milan Country of Publication: Italy NLM ID: 0177625 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1826-6983 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00338362 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Radiol Med Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Milan : Springer Milan
      Original Publication: Torino [etc.] Minerva medica.
    • Subject Terms:
      Radiation Exposure*; Cardiovascular Diseases/*diagnostic imaging ; Computed Tomography Angiography/*methods ; Multidetector Computed Tomography/*methods ; Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection/*methods; Computed Tomography Angiography/adverse effects ; Computed Tomography Angiography/instrumentation ; Coronary Angiography/adverse effects ; Coronary Angiography/instrumentation ; Coronary Angiography/methods ; Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging ; Equipment Safety ; Humans ; Multidetector Computed Tomography/adverse effects ; Multidetector Computed Tomography/instrumentation ; Radiation Dosage ; Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection/adverse effects ; Radiography, Dual-Energy Scanned Projection/instrumentation ; Retrospective Studies ; Time Factors
    • Abstract:
      Purpose: To compare radiation exposure associated with daily practice cardiovascular (CV) examinations performed on two different multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners, a conventional 64-MDCT and a third-generation dual-source (DS) MDCT.
      Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 1458 patients who underwent CV examinations between January 2017 and August 2018 were enrolled. A single-source 64-MDCT (Lightspeed VCT, GE) scan was performed in 705 patients from January to August 2017 (207 coronary examinations and 498 vascular examinations) and 753 patients underwent third-generation 192 × 2-DSCT (Somatom FORCE, Siemens) scan from January to August 2018 (302 coronary examinations and 451 vascular examinations). Volume CT dose index (CTDI vol ), dose length product (DLP), effective dose (ED), tube voltage (TV) and exposure time (ET), pitch factor (PF) were registered for each patient. Student's t test was used to compare mean values between each corresponding group of MDCT and DSCT.
      Results: In coronary examinations with DSCT, CTDI vol was 24.4% lower (23.1 mGy vs 30.6 mGy, p < 0.0001) and DLP and ED reductions were 35.6% than with MDCT (465.0 mGy * cm vs 732.3 mGy * cm and 6.5 mSv and 10.3 mSv; vs p < 0.0001). Concerning scan parameters, kVp and ET reductions were 12.7% and 69.4%, respectively (p < 0.0001); PF increase was 73.8% (p < 0.0001). In all vascular studies, DSCT, compared with MDCT, permitted to reduce CTDI vol from 43.5 to 70.6%; DLP and ED reductions were from 50.3 to 73.1%; kVp and ET decreases were from 10.7 to 32.5% and from 26.3 to 68.7%. PF increase was from 16.7 to 58.1% (all differences with p < 0.0001).
      Conclusions: In daily practice, CV examinations CTDI, DLP, ED, ET and TV were lower and PF was higher with 192 × 2-DSCT compared to 64-MDCT.
    • References:
      Radiology. 2000 Apr;215(1):138-46. (PMID: 10751479)
      J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2001 Jul-Aug;25(4):580-6. (PMID: 11473190)
      Radiology. 2003 May;227(2):426-33. (PMID: 12676973)
      Radiographics. 2003 Oct;23 Spec No:S93-110. (PMID: 14557505)
      Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2003 May-Jun;26(3):290-5. (PMID: 14562981)
      Radiology. 2004 May;231(2):393-8. (PMID: 15031431)
      Circulation. 2004 May 11;109(18):2160-7. (PMID: 15136509)
      N Engl J Med. 2005 Apr 28;352(17):1760-8. (PMID: 15858185)
      J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005 May;16(5):663-7. (PMID: 15872321)
      Eur J Radiol. 2006 Nov;60(2):279-86. (PMID: 16887313)
      JAMA. 2007 Jul 18;298(3):317-23. (PMID: 17635892)
      Radiology. 2007 Aug;244(2):419-28. (PMID: 17641365)
      Eur J Radiol. 2008 Jul;67(1):78-84. (PMID: 17766073)
      Eur Heart J. 2007 Dec;28(24):3042-50. (PMID: 17981829)
      Heart. 2008 Nov;94(11):1386-93. (PMID: 18669550)
      Am J Med. 2008 Aug;121(8):715-25. (PMID: 18691486)
      Eur J Radiol. 2008 Dec;68(3):362-8. (PMID: 18842371)
      Korean J Radiol. 2009 May-Jun;10(3):285-93. (PMID: 19412517)
      Eur Radiol. 2009 Dec;19(12):2896-903. (PMID: 19760229)
      Eur Radiol. 2009 Nov;19(11):2576-83. (PMID: 19760421)
      Eur Heart J. 2010 Feb;31(3):340-6. (PMID: 19897497)
      Heart. 2010 Jun;96(12):933-8. (PMID: 20538669)
      Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011 Jul;27(6):755-71. (PMID: 20857200)
      Eur Radiol. 2011 Mar;21(3):505-9. (PMID: 20957482)
      JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011 Apr;4(4):328-37. (PMID: 21492807)
      Eur Radiol. 2012 Feb;22(2):279-86. (PMID: 21874569)
      Br J Radiol. 2012 May;85(1013):495-510. (PMID: 22253353)
      Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Feb;29(2):443-52. (PMID: 22806317)
      Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2012 Jun;2(2):98-105. (PMID: 23256066)
      Eur Radiol. 2014 Aug;24(8):1889-95. (PMID: 24838737)
      J Clin Imaging Sci. 2016 Oct 21;6:44. (PMID: 27833784)
      Acad Radiol. 2017 Jan;24(1):30-37. (PMID: 28029558)
      Am J Cardiol. 2017 Apr 15;119(8):1156-1161. (PMID: 28233536)
      Eur Heart J. 2018 Nov 1;39(41):3715-3723. (PMID: 30165629)
      Radiographics. 1999 Jan-Feb;19(1):45-60; quiz 149-50. (PMID: 9925391)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: 192 × 2 dual-source computed tomography; 64 single-source computed tomography; Cardiovascular examinations; Radiation dose comparison
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20190424 Date Completed: 20190925 Latest Revision: 20200225
    • Publication Date:
      20240829
    • Accession Number:
      10.1007/s11547-019-01036-6
    • Accession Number:
      31011995