|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
01000naa a22002652 4500 |
| 001 |
NLM28626191X |
| 003 |
DE-627 |
| 005 |
20231225051307.0 |
| 007 |
cr uuu---uuuuu |
| 008 |
231225s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c |
| 024 |
7 |
|
|a 10.1016/j.jsha.2017.11.001
|2 doi
|
| 028 |
5 |
2 |
|a pubmed24n0954.xml
|
| 035 |
|
|
|a (DE-627)NLM28626191X
|
| 035 |
|
|
|a (NLM)29983492
|
| 040 |
|
|
|a DE-627
|b ger
|c DE-627
|e rakwb
|
| 041 |
|
|
|a eng
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Smettei, Osama A
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Ultra-fast, low dose high-pitch (FLASH) versus prospectively-gated coronary computed tomography angiography
|b Comparison of image quality and patient radiation exposure
|
| 264 |
|
1 |
|c 2018
|
| 336 |
|
|
|a Text
|b txt
|2 rdacontent
|
| 337 |
|
|
|a ƒaComputermedien
|b c
|2 rdamedia
|
| 338 |
|
|
|a ƒa Online-Ressource
|b cr
|2 rdacarrier
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Date Revised 18.03.2022
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a published: Print-Electronic
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a BACKGROUND: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is increasingly being used for the evaluation of coronary artery disease; however, radiation exposure remains a major limitation of its use
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a OBJECTIVE: To compare image quality and radiation exposure in two groups of patients undergoing CCTA using a 256-slice dual-source helical computed tomography scanner with high-pitch (FLASH) or prospective [step-and-shoot (SAS)] gating protocols
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a METHODS: A prospective, single-center study was performed in our cardiac center. In total, 162 patients underwent CCTA with either FLASH or SAS scanning protocols. Subjective image quality was graded on the basis of a four-point grading system (1, non-diagnostic; 2, adequate; 3, good; 4, excellent). Objective image quality was assessed using image signal, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The effective radiation dose was also estimated
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a RESULTS: The clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients in both groups were similar. The median age of the patients in both groups was 48.43 years, and males accounted for 63% and 68.7% of the FLASH and SAS groups, respectively. We found that the subjective image quality obtained with the FLASH protocol was superior to that obtained with the SAS protocol (3.35 ± 0.6 mSv vs. 2.82 ± 0.61 mSv; p < 0.001). Image noise was higher in the FLASH group but was not statistically significant (25.0 ± 6.13 vs. 24.0 ± 6.8; p = 0.10), whereas the signal and SNR was significantly higher with the FLASH protocol than with the SAS protocol [(469 ± 116 vs. 397 ± 106; p > 0.001) and (21.6 ± 8.7 mSv vs. 16.6 ± 7.7 mSv; p < 0.001), respectively]. Radiation exposure was 62% lower in the FLASH protocol than in the SAS protocol, (1.9 ± 0.4 mSv vs. 5.12 ± 1.8 mSv; p < 0.001)
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a CONCLUSION: The use of 256-slice CCTA performed with the FLASH protocol has a better objective and subjective image quality as well as lower radiation exposure when compared with the use of prospective electrocardiography gating
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Journal Article
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Cardiac CT protocol
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Computed tomography angiography
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a ECG gating
|
| 650 |
|
4 |
|a Radiation exposure
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Sayed, Sawsan
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a M Al Habib, Abdullah
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Alharbi, Fahad
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Abazid, Rami M
|e verfasserin
|4 aut
|
| 773 |
0 |
8 |
|i Enthalten in
|t Journal of the Saudi Heart Association
|d 1999
|g 30(2018), 3 vom: 14. Juli, Seite 165-171
|w (DE-627)NLM098225227
|x 1016-7315
|7 nnns
|
| 773 |
1 |
8 |
|g volume:30
|g year:2018
|g number:3
|g day:14
|g month:07
|g pages:165-171
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2017.11.001
|3 Volltext
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a SYSFLAG_A
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_NLM
|
| 912 |
|
|
|a GBV_ILN_350
|
| 951 |
|
|
|a AR
|
| 952 |
|
|
|d 30
|j 2018
|e 3
|b 14
|c 07
|h 165-171
|