...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Academic radiology >Comparison of image quality and arterial enhancement with a dedicated coronary CTA protocol versus a triple rule-out coronary CTA protocol.
【24h】

Comparison of image quality and arterial enhancement with a dedicated coronary CTA protocol versus a triple rule-out coronary CTA protocol.

机译：使用专用冠状动脉CTA方案与三重排除冠状动脉CTA方案的图像质量和动脉增强的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the image quality of dedicated coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) to that of triple rule-out (TRO) CTA designed to evaluate the coronary arteries, thoracic aorta, and pulmonary arteries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive cCTA examinations performed by a single radiologist over 1 year were reviewed. Biphasic injection protocols were employed: 70 mL of optiray-350 followed by 40 mL of saline injected at 5.5 mL/second for dedicated cCTA; 70 mL of optiray-350 followed by 25 mL of the contrast diluted with 25 mL of saline injected at 5.0 mL/second for TRO-CTA. Two independent cardiovascular radiologists reviewed the coronary vessels in each case and rated diagnostic image quality on a 5 point scale (1, suboptimal; 3, adequate; 5, excellent). Vascular enhancement was measured in the coronary arteries, aorta, and pulmonary arteries. RESULTS: There was excellent interobserver agreement between the cardiovascular radiologists (kappa = 0.91). Coronary image quality score were similar among 260 dedicated cCTA studies and 168 TRO-CTA studies (mean: 3.8-3.9. P > .18). At least one coronary segment demonstrated suboptimal image quality in 8% of examinations, including 18 dedicated cCTA studies and 16 TRO studies (P = .94). Enhancement was greater in the distal thoracic aorta of TRO patients (336 vs. 311 Hounsfield units; P = .01); no other significant differences in enhancement were identified in the aorta and coronary arteries of dedicated cCTA and TRO studies. Vascular enhancement was adequate for diagnostic evaluation of the pulmonary arteries in all TRO studies. CONCLUSIONS: A TRO-CTA protocol using 95 mL of contrast can provide comparable coronary image quality and coronary vascular enhancement as compared to dedicated cCTA with 70 mL of contrast.
机译：理由和目的：比较专用冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影（cCTA）和旨在评估冠状动脉，胸主动脉和肺动脉的三重排除（TRO）CTA的图像质量。材料与方法：回顾了由一名放射科医生连续1年进行的连续cCTA检查。采用双相注射方案：70 mL的optiray-350，然后以5.5 mL /秒的速度注射40 mL盐水，用于专用cCTA;对于TRO-CTA，先加入70 mL的optiray-350和25 mL的造影剂，然后以25 mL的盐水稀释，以5.0 mL /秒的速度注入。两名独立的心血管放射科医生对每种情况的冠状动脉血管进行了检查，并以5分制对诊断图像质量进行了评分（1分，次优; 3分，足够; 5分，极好）。测量冠状动脉，主动脉和肺动脉的血管增强。结果：心血管放射科医生之间的观察者之间达成了极好的共识（kappa = 0.91）。在260个专门的cCTA研究和168个TRO-CTA研究中，冠状动脉图像质量评分相似（平均值：3.8-3.9。P> .18）。在8％的检查中，至少有一个冠状动脉段显示出次佳的图像质量，包括18个专门的cCTA研究和16个TRO研究（P = .94）。 TRO患者的远端胸主动脉增强更大（336对311 Hounsfield单位; P = 0.01）;在专用cCTA和TRO研究的主动脉和冠状动脉中，没有发现增强方面的其他显着差异。在所有TRO研究中，血管增强足以诊断肺动脉。结论：与具有70 mL对比的专用cCTA相比，使用95 mL对比的TRO-CTA方案可提供可比的冠状动脉图像质量和冠状血管增强。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号