Low-Dose Cardiovascular Computed Tomography: Where are the Limits?

Non-inferior low-dose coronary computed tomography angiography image quality with knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction for overweight patients

We investigated the feasibility of low-dose coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), using a prospective electrocardiogram (ECG)-triggered axial scan protocol, knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR), and fixed tube current, in overweight subjects. Forty non-overweight (group A; body-mass index [BMI] < 25 kg/m²) and 40 overweight individuals (group B; BMI = 25–30 kg/m²), who underwent CCTA for coronary artery disease screening, were retrospectively and consecutively enrolled. A 64-slice CT scanner was used at 100-kVp tube voltage and 150-mA tube current, and images were reconstructed using IMR techniques. Image noise, attenuation at the aorta, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) at the proximal right and left main coronary arteries (pRCA and LMCA) were calculated. CCTA images were qualitatively evaluated using a four-point scale (1, poor; 4, excellent) and analyzed using a non-inferiority test with a pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -0.2. The mean CCTA radiation dose (Group A: 1.33 ± 0.02 mSv; Group B: 1.35 ± 0.10 mSv; p = 0.151) and mean aortic root CT attenuation values (Group A: 447.9 ± 81.6 HU; Group B: 439.5 ± 63.6 HU; p = 0.571) did not differ significantly between the two groups. The mean noise in groups A and B was 26.0 ± 4.8 HU and 29.2 ± 4.4 HU, respectively (p = 0.005). The noise reduction ratio in the groups, compared to filtered back projection, was 65.0% and 68.1%, respectively. The mean grade of image quality did not differ significantly (3.75 ± 0.04 vs. 3.71 ± 0.04, p = 0.478). Group B CCTA image quality was non-inferior (mean difference = -0.043, 95% CI = -0.162–0.077) to that of Group A. We concluded that low-dose CCTA with prospective ECG-triggering and IMR might be applied to overweight subjects, as well as to normal-weight subjects, by using a fixed tube current without an increase in tube current based on the patient’s body size.

Toward a Framework for Benefit-Risk Assessment in Diagnostic Imaging: Identifying Scenario-specific Criteria

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic imaging has many effects and there is no common definition of value in diagnostic radiology. As benefit-risk trade-offs are rarely made explicit, it is not clear which framework is used in clinical guideline development. We describe initial steps toward the creation of a benefit-risk framework for diagnostic radiology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search and an online survey of physicians to identify and collect benefit-risk criteria (BRC) relevant to diagnostic imaging tests. We operationalized a process for selection of BRC with the use of four clinical use case scenarios that vary by diagnostic alternatives and clinical indication. Respondent BRC selections were compared across clinical scenarios and between radiologists and nonradiologists.

RESULTS

Thirty-six BRC were identified and organized into three domains: (1) those that account for differences attributable only to the test or device (n = 17); (2) those that account for clinical management and provider experiences (n = 12); and (3) those that capture patient experience (n = 7). Forty-eight survey participants selected 22 criteria from the initial list in the survey (9-11 per case). Engaging ordering physicians increased the number of criteria selected in each of the four clinical scenarios presented. We developed a process for standardizing selection of BRC in guideline development.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that a process relying on elements of comparative effectiveness and the use of standardized BRC may ensure consistent examination of differences among alternatives by way of making explicit implicit trade-offs that otherwise enter the decision-making space and detract from consistency and transparency. These findings also highlight the need for multidisciplinary teams that include input from ordering physicians.

Use of coronary CT angiography in the diagnosis of patients with suspected coronary artery disease: findings and clinical indications

Objective

To investigate the clinical applications of coronary CT angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease and identify factors that affect CT findings.

Methods

Medical records of patients suspected of coronary artery disease over a period of 12 months from a tertiary teaching hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Patient age, sex (male/female), duration of symptoms and abnormal rates of coronary CT angiography scans were analysed to investigate the relationship among these parameters. The patients by age were characterized into five groups: under 36 years, 36–45 years, 46–55 years, 56–65 years and more than 66 years, respectively; while the duration of symptoms was also classified into five groups: less than one week, one week to one month, one to three months, three to six months and more than six months.

Results

Of the 880 patient records reviewed, 800 met the above study criteria. Five hundred and forty nine patients demonstrated abnormal CT findings (68.6%). There was no significant difference in the percentage of abnormal CT findings based on patient sex and the duration of symptoms (P = 0.14). The abnormal rates of coronary CT angiography, however, increased significantly with increasing age (P < 0.001); with patients over 65 years of age 2.5 times more likely to have an abnormal CT scan relative to a patient under 45 years. A significant difference was found between abnormal coronary CT angiography and the duration of symptoms (P = 0.012).

Conclusions

Our results indicate coronary CT angiography findings are significantly related to the patient age group and duration of symptoms. Clinical referral for coronary CT angiography of patients with suspected coronary artery disease needs to be justified with regard to the judicious use of this imaging modality.