Coronary artery stent imaging with 128-slice dual-source CT using high-pitch spiral acquisition in a cardiac phantom: comparison with the sequential and low-pitch spiral mode.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate coronary stents in vitro using 128-slice-dual-source computed tomography (CT).


METHODS
Twelve different coronary stents placed in a non-moving cardiac/chest phantom were examined by 128-slice dual-source CT using three CT protocols [high-pitch spiral (HPS), sequential (SEQ) and conventional spiral (SPIR)]. Artificial in-stent lumen narrowing (ALN), visible inner stent area (VIA), artificial in-stent lumen attenuation (ALA) in percent, image noise inside/outside the stent and CTDIvol were measured.


RESULTS
Mean ALN was 46% for HPS, 44% for SEQ and 47% for SPIR without significant difference. Mean VIA was similar with 31% for HPS, 30% for SEQ and 33% for SPIR. Mean ALA was, at 5% for HPS, significantly lower compared with -11% for SPIR (p = 0.024), but not different from SEQ with -1%. Mean image noise was significantly higher for HPS compared with SEQ and SPIR inside and outside the stent (p < 0.001). CTDIvol was lower for HPS (5.17 mGy), compared with SEQ (9.02 mGy) and SPIR (55.97 mGy), respectively.


CONCLUSIONS
The HPS mode of 128-slice dual-source CT yields fewer artefacts inside the stent lumen compared with SPIR and SEQ, but image noise is higher. ALN is still too high for routine stent evaluation in clinical practice. Radiation dose of the HPS mode is markedly (less than about tenfold) reduced.
Wolf
Florian
F
Department of Radiology, Division of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. florian.wolf@meduniwien.ac.at
Leschka
Sebastian
S
Loewe
Christian
C
Homolka
Peter
P
Plank
Christina
C
Schernthaner
Ruediger
R
Bercaczy
Dominik
D
Goetti
Robert
R
Lammer
Johannes
J
Friedrich
Guy
G
Marincek
Borut
B
Alkadhi
Hatem
H
Feuchtner
Gudrun
G
D000465:Algorithms; D001807:Blood Vessel Prosthesis; D017023:Coronary Angiography / Q000379:methods*; D003331:Coronary Vessels / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement / Q000379:methods; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D015607:Stents; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009 Jul-Aug;3(4):224-32
19577209
Eur Heart J. 2006 Nov;27(21):2567-72
17035252
Eur Radiol. 2009 Nov;19(11):2576-83
19760421
Heart. 2008 Jul;94(7):848-54
17881474
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jul;191(1):56-63
18562725
Invest Radiol. 2006 Jan;41(1):22-7
16355036
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Sep;193(3):787-94
19696293
Am J Cardiol. 2007 Dec 15;100(12):1754-8
18082521
Phys Med Biol. 2002 Aug 21;47(16):2907-16
12222854
Eur Radiol. 2009 Sep;19(9):2147-55
19415293
Radiology. 2007 Nov;245(2):416-23
17890353
Radiology. 2008 Jun;247(3):687-95
18424688
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Apr;192(4):1045-50
19304712
Eur Radiol. 2009 Oct;19(10):2357-62
19565245
Eur J Radiol. 2008 Dec;68(3):465-70
17913428
Radiology. 2007 Nov;245(2):424-32
17890354
Eur J Radiol. 2009 Mar;69(3):489-95
18162351
Am J Cardiol. 2008 Mar 15;101(6):820-4
18328847
Eur J Radiol. 2010 Nov;76(2):188-94
19570632
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Mar 6;49(9):951-9
17336718
Eur Radiol. 2009 Jan;19(1):42-9
18682956
Acta Radiol. 2006 Feb;47(1):36-42
16498931
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009 Mar-Apr;3(2):117-21
19332343
Eur Radiol. 2009 Dec;19(12):2896-903
19760229
Eur Radiol. 2006 Apr;16(4):818-26
16333623
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007 Jun 1;69(7):933-8
17421013