Accuracy and Radiation Dose Reduction Using Low-Voltage Computed Tomography Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring With Tin Filtration.

This study prospectively investigated the accuracy and radiation dose reduction of CT coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) using a 100 kVp acquisition protocol with tin filtration (Sn100 kVp) compared with the standard 120 kVp acquisition protocol; 70 patients (59% men, 62.1 ± 10.7 years) who underwent a clinically indicated CACS acquisition using the standard 120 kVp protocol on a third-generation dual-source CT system were enrolled. An additional Sn100 kVp CACS scan was performed. Agatston scores and categories, percentile-based risk categorization, and radiation dose estimates were derived from 120 and Sn100 kVp studies and compared. Median Agatston scores from the Sn100 and 120 kVp acquisitions were 38.2 and 41.2, respectively (p <0.0001). Excellent correlation of Agatston scores was found between the 2 acquisitions (r = 0.99, p <0.0001). Although the Agatston scores were systematically lower with Sn100 than with 120 kVp, the comparison of Agatston score categories and percentile-based cardiac risk categories showed excellent agreement (κ = 0.98 and κ = 0.98). Image noise was 26.3 ± 5.7 Hounsfield units in Sn100 kVp and 17.6 ± 4.1 Hounsfield units in 120 kVP scans (p <0.0001). The dose-length product was 14.1 ± 3.7 mGy·cm with Sn100 kVp and 58.5 ± 23.5 mGy·cm with 120 kVp scans (p <0.0001), resulting in a significantly lower effective radiation dose (0.19 ± 0.05 vs 0.82 ± 0.32 mSv, p <0.0001) for Sn100 kVp scans. CACS using a low-voltage tin filtration protocol shows excellent correlation and agreement with the standard method with regard to the Agatston score and subsequent cardiac risk categorization, while achieving a 75% reduction in radiation dose.

[1]  Jörg Hausleiter,et al.  Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. , 2009, JAMA.

[2]  Young Jun Cho,et al.  Iterative image reconstruction techniques for CT coronary artery calcium quantification: comparison with traditional filtered back projection in vitro and in vivo. , 2014, Radiology.

[3]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[4]  C. Henschke,et al.  Low- vs. standard-dose coronary artery calcium scanning. , 2015, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[5]  B. Merkely,et al.  The effect of iterative model reconstruction on coronary artery calcium quantification , 2015, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[6]  J. R. Landis,et al.  An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. , 1977, Biometrics.

[7]  C. Hildebolt,et al.  Automated Low-Kilovoltage Selection in Pediatric Computed Tomography Angiography: Phantom Study Evaluating Effects on Radiation Dose and Image Quality , 2013, Investigative radiology.

[8]  Tim Leiner,et al.  Coronary artery calcification scoring with state-of-the-art CT scanners from different vendors has substantial effect on risk classification. , 2014, Radiology.

[9]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Very low-dose coronary artery calcium scanning with high-pitch spiral acquisition mode: comparison between 120-kV and 100-kV tube voltage protocols. , 2013, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[10]  R. Detrano,et al.  Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  Bernhard Bischoff,et al.  Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography results of the PROTECTION II Trial. , 2010, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[12]  R. Vliegenthart,et al.  Approaches to ultra-low radiation dose coronary artery calcium scoring based on 3rd generation dual-source CT: A phantom study. , 2016, European journal of radiology.

[13]  Michael Fiechter,et al.  Inter-scan variability of coronary artery calcium scoring assessed on 64-multidetector computed tomography vs. dual-source computed tomography: a head-to-head comparison. , 2011, European heart journal.

[14]  D. Dey,et al.  Coronary artery calcium scoring using a reduced tube voltage and radiation dose protocol with dual-source computed tomography. , 2009, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[15]  R. Bauer,et al.  Noncalcified atherosclerotic plaque burden at coronary CT angiography: a better predictor of ischemia at stress myocardial perfusion imaging than calcium score and stenosis severity. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  D. Dey,et al.  Low radiation coronary calcium scoring by dual-source CT with tube current optimization based on patient body size. , 2012, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[17]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[18]  Tobias A. Fuchs,et al.  Coronary computed tomography angiography with model-based iterative reconstruction using a radiation exposure similar to chest X-ray examination , 2014, European heart journal.

[19]  Richard A. Kronmal,et al.  Distribution of Coronary Artery Calcium by Race, Gender, and Age: Results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) , 2005, Circulation.