Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography

  • Cardiac
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to quantify radiation dose parameters of dual-source CT coronary angiography. Eighty patients underwent contrast-enhanced, retrospectively ECG-gated dual-source CT coronary angiography with heart rate-adapted ECG pulsing using two algorithms: In 40 patients, the tube current was reduced to 20% (Amin1) of the normal tube current (Amax) outside the pulsing window; in 40 patients tube current was reduced to 4% (Amin2) of Amax. Mean CTDIvol in the Amin1 group was 45.1 ± 3.6 mGy; the mean CTDIvol in the Amin2 group was 39.1 ± 3.2 mGy, with CTDIvol in the Amin2 group being significantly reduced when compared to the Amin1 group (P < 0.001). A significant negative correlation was found between CTDIvol and heart rate in group Amin1 (r = −0.82, P < 0.001), whereas no correlation was found between CTDIvol and heart rate in group Amin2 (r = −0.066). Using the conversion coefficient for the chest, dual-source CT coronary angiography resulted in an estimated mean effective dose of 8.8 mSv in the Amin1 group and 7.8 mSv in the Amin2. Radiation exposure of dual-source CT coronary angiography using an ECG-pulsing protocol reducing the tube current to 20% significantly decreases with increasing heart rates, despite using wider pulsing windows at higher heart rates. When using a protocol with reduced tube current of 4%, the radiation dose is significantly lower, irrespective of the heart rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leber AW et al (2005) Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:147–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Leschka S et al (2005) Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 26:1482–1487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mollet NR et al (2005) High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 112:2318–2323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Goldstein JA (2005) Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:552–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Flohr TG et al (2006) First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16:256–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Achenbach S et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced coronary artery visualization by dual-source computed tomography–initial experience. Eur J Radiol 57:331–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson TR et al (2006) Dual-source CT cardiac imaging: initial experience. Eur Radiol 16:1409–1415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Scheffel H et al (2006) Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: First experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 16:2739–2747

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yates SJ, Pike LC, Goldstone KE (2004) Effect of multislice scanners on patient dose from routine CT examinations in East Anglia. Br J Radiol 77:472–478

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gerber TC, Kuzo RS, Morin RL (2005) Techniques and parameters for estimating radiation exposure and dose in cardiac computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 21:165–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Zhang J, Fletcher JG (2006) Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT. Radiographics 26:1785–1794

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jakobs TF et al (2002) Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 12:1081–1086

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. McCollough CH et al (2007) Dose performance of a 64-channel dual-source CT scanner. Radiology 243:775–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Leschka S et al (2007) Image Quality and Reconstruction Intervals of Dual-Source CT Coronary Angiography: Recommendations for ECG-Pulsing Windowing. Invest Radiol 42:543–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Menzel H, Schibilla H, Teunen D, eds. (2000) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Luxembourg: European Commission Publication No. EUR 16262 EN

  16. Hausleiter J et al (2006) Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 113:1305–1310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morin RL (1988) Monte carlo simulation in the radiological sciences. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  18. Austen WG et al (1975) A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 51:5–40

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. McCollough CH (2003) Patient dose in cardiac computed tomography. Herz 28:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McCollough CH, Schueler BA (2000) Calculation of effective dose. Med Phys 27:828–837

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schardt P et al (2004) New x-ray tube performance in computed tomography by introducing the rotating envelope tube technology. Med Phys 31:2699–2706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wierzbicki M, Guiraudon GM, Jones DL, Peters T (2007) Dose reduction for cardiac CT using a registration-based approach. Med Phys 34:1884–1895

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kuon E, Robinson DM, Empen K, Dahm JB (2005) [Fluoroscopy time – an overestimated factor for patient radiation exposure in invasive cardiology]. Rofo 177:812–817

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Coles DR et al (2006) Comparison of radiation doses from multislice computed tomography coronary angiography and conventional diagnostic angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:1840–1845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Aroua A, Trueb P, Vader JP, Valley JF, Verdun FR (2007) Exposure of the Swiss population by radiodiagnostics: 2003 review. Health Phys 92:442–448

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Zanzonico P, Rothenberg LN, Strauss HW (2006) Radiation exposure of computed tomography and direct intracoronary angiography: risk has its reward. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:1846–1849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Becker C et al (1999) [Assessment of the effective dose for routine protocols in conventional CT, electron beam CT and coronary angiography]. Rofo 170:99–104

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Das M et al (2005) Individually adapted examination protocols for reduction of radiation exposure for 16-MDCT chest examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1437–1443

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nyman U, Ahl TL, Kristiansson M, Nilsson L, Wettemark S (2005) Patient-circumference-adapted dose regulation in body computed tomography. A practical and flexible formula. Acta Radiol 46:396–406

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research has been supported by the National Center of Competence in Research, Computer Aided and Image Guided Medical Interventions of the Swiss National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland

    Paul Stolzmann, Hans Scheffel, Thomas Schertler, Thomas Frauenfelder, Sebastian Leschka, Lars Husmann, Borut Marincek & Hatem Alkadhi

  2. Siemens Medical Solutions, Forchheim, Germany

    Thomas G. Flohr

  3. Cardiovascular Center, Forchheim, Germany

    Philipp A. Kaufmann

Authors
  1. Paul Stolzmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans Scheffel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Schertler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Frauenfelder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sebastian Leschka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lars Husmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Thomas G. Flohr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Borut Marincek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Philipp A. Kaufmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hatem Alkadhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hatem Alkadhi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stolzmann, P., Scheffel, H., Schertler, T. et al. Radiation dose estimates in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 18, 592–599 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0786-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0786-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation