These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: ECG-gated Versus Non-ECG-gated High-pitch Dual-source CT for Whole Body CT Angiography (CTA).
    Author: Beeres M, Wichmann JL, Frellesen C, Bucher AM, Albrecht M, Scholtz JE, Nour-Eldin NE, Gruber-Rouh T, Lee C, Vogl TJ, Lehnert T.
    Journal: Acad Radiol; 2016 Feb; 23(2):163-7. PubMed ID: 26548854.
    Abstract:
    RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate motion artifacts, image quality, and practical differences in electrocardiographic (ECG)-gated versus non-ECG-gated high-pitch dual-source computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the whole aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two groups, each including 40 patients, underwent either ECG-gated or non-ECG-gated high-pitch dual-source CTA of the whole aorta. The aortic annulus, aortic valve, coronary ostia, and the presence of motion artifacts of the thoracic aorta as well as vascular contrast down to the femoral arteries were independently assessed by two readers. Additional objective parameters including image noise and signal-to-noise ratio were analyzed. RESULTS: Subjective and objective scoring revealed no presence of motional artifacts regardless of whether the ECG-gated or the non-ECG-gated protocol was used (P > 0.1). Image acquisition parameters (examination length, examination duration, radiation dose) were comparable between the two groups without significant differences. The aortic annulus, aortic valve, and coronary ostia were reliably evaluable in all patients. Vascular contrast was rated excellent in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: High-pitch dual-source CTA of the whole aorta is a robust and dose-efficient examination strategy for the evaluation of aortic pathologies whether or not ECG gating is used.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]