AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Matt, D.
Right arrow Articles by Alkadhi, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Matt, D.
Right arrow Articles by Alkadhi, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

Dual-Source CT Coronary Angiography: Image Quality, Mean Heart Rate, and Heart Rate Variability

David Matt1, Hans Scheffel1, Sebastian Leschka1, Thomas G. Flohr2, Borut Marincek1, Philipp A. Kaufmann3,4 and Hatem Alkadhi1

1 Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
2 Siemens Medical Solutions, Forchheim, Germany.
3 Cardiovascular Center, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
4 Zurich Center for Integrative Human Physiology, Zurich, Switzerland.


Figure 1
View larger version (87K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1 —55-year-old man with mean heart rate of 61 beats per minute (bpm) and variability of 1.8 bpm. Curved multiplanar reconstruction and volume-rendered (inset) dual-source CT are of excellent quality without motion artifacts (score 1) in all segments of right coronary artery.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (121K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2 —47-year-old woman with mean heart rate of 99 beats per minute (bpm) and variability of 1.6 bpm. Curved multiplanar reconstruction and volume-rendered (inset) dual-source CT images are of good quality with mild vessel blurring (score 2) in middle segment of right coronary artery.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (114K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 3 —60-year-old man with mean heart rate of 52 beats per minute (bpm) and variability of 2.7 bpm. Curved multiplanar reconstruction and volume-rendered (inset) dual-source CT images are of adequate quality with moderate motion artifacts (score 3) in proximal and middle segments of right coronary artery.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (92K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 4 —68-year-old woman with mean heart rate of 68 beats per minute (bpm) and variability of 8.4 bpm. Curved multiplanar reconstruction and volume-rendered (inset) dual-source CT images are not evaluative, having severe motion artifacts (score 4) and vessel discontinuity in middle segment of right coronary artery.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 5 —Linear regression plot shows mean image quality scores over all segments per patient (y-axis) against mean heart rate during CT (x-axis). Curves represent 95% CIs. Linear regression indicates no significant degradation of image quality with increasing mean heart rate (Pearson's correlation, r =0.20; p = 0.070, not significant).

 

Figure 6
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 6 —Linear regression plot shows mean image quality scores over all segments per patient (y-axis) against heart rate variability during CT (x-axis). Curves represent 95% CIs. Linear regression indicates no significant degradation of image quality with increasing heart rate variability (Pearson's correlation, r = 0.21; p = 0.059, not significant).

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.