Suppr超能文献

16排螺旋CT冠状动脉造影术中静脉注射对比剂:试验性团注与团注追踪技术

Intravenous contrast material administration at 16-detector row helical CT coronary angiography: test bolus versus bolus-tracking technique.

作者信息

Cademartiri Filippo, Nieman Koen, van der Lugt Aad, Raaijmakers Rolf H, Mollet Nico, Pattynama Peter M T, de Feyter Pim J, Krestin Gabriel P

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Radiology. 2004 Dec;233(3):817-23. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2333030668. Epub 2004 Oct 29.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare test bolus and bolus-tracking techniques for intravenous contrast material administration at 16-detector row computed tomographic (CT) coronary angiography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study had institutional review board approval, and patients gave informed consent. Thirty-eight patients (mean age, 60 years; three women) were randomized into two groups according to bolus timing technique: group 1 (20-mL test bolus with 100-mL main bolus) and group 2 (bolus tracking with 100-mL main bolus). All patients underwent electrocardiography-gated 16-detector row CT coronary angiography with 12 detectors (collimation, 0.75 mm; rotation time, 420 msec). In group 1, test bolus peak attenuation was used as a delay, while in group 2, a +100-HU threshold in ascending aorta triggered angiographic acquisition, with an additional 4-second delay for patient instruction. Attenuation was measured in the longitudinal direction throughout the examination in three main vessels: ascending aorta (region of interest [ROI] 1), descending aorta (ROI 2), and main pulmonary artery (ROI 3). Mean attenuation and slope of bolus geometry curve were calculated in each patient and ROI. Attenuation at origin of coronary arteries was measured. Student t test was used to compare results.

RESULTS

Mean scan delay was 6 seconds longer in group 2 (P < .05). Average attenuation values were 306.6 HU +/- 44.0 (standard deviation) and 328.2 HU +/- 58.6 (P > .05) in ROI 1, 291.6 HU +/- 45.1 and 326.4 HU +/- 62.6 (P > .05) in ROI 2, and 354.7 HU +/- 78.0 and 305.3 HU +/- 71.4 (P < .05) in ROI 3 for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Average slope values were 5.8 and -0.8 (P < .05) in ROI 1, 7.7 and 0.7 (P < .05) in ROI 2, and -1.0 and -13.3 (P < .05) in ROI 3 for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Average attenuation values in left main, left anterior descending, and left circumflex arteries were higher in group 2 (P < .05); there were no differences (P > .05) between groups in right coronary artery.

CONCLUSION

Bolus-tracking yields more homogeneous enhancement than does the test bolus technique.

摘要

目的

比较在16排螺旋CT冠状动脉造影中静脉注射对比剂时的试验团注法和团注追踪法。

材料与方法

本研究经机构审查委员会批准,患者均签署知情同意书。38例患者(平均年龄60岁;女性3例)根据团注给药时间技术随机分为两组:第1组(20ml试验团注加100ml主团注)和第2组(100ml主团注的团注追踪法)。所有患者均接受心电图门控16排螺旋CT冠状动脉造影,探测器准直为12排(准直宽度0.75mm;旋转时间420ms)。第1组中,试验团注峰值衰减用作延迟时间,而在第2组中,升主动脉中+100HU阈值触发血管造影采集,并额外延迟4秒用于指导患者。在整个检查过程中,在三个主要血管的纵向上测量衰减:升主动脉(感兴趣区[ROI]1)、降主动脉(ROI 2)和主肺动脉(ROI 3)。计算每位患者和每个ROI的平均衰减和团注几何曲线斜率。测量冠状动脉起始处的衰减。采用Student t检验比较结果。

结果

第2组的平均扫描延迟长6秒(P<0.05)。第1组和第2组在ROI 1中的平均衰减值分别为306.6HU±44.0(标准差)和328.2HU±58.6(P>0.05),在ROI 2中分别为291.6HU±45.1和326.4HU±62.6(P>0.05),在ROI 3中分别为354.7HU±78.0和305.3HU±71.4(P<0.05)。第1组和第2组在ROI 1中的平均斜率值分别为5.8和-0.8(P<0.05),在ROI 2中分别为7.7和0.7(P<0.05),在ROI 3中分别为-1.0和-13.3(P<0.05)。第2组左主干、左前降支和左旋支动脉的平均衰减值较高(P<0.05);右冠状动脉两组间无差异(P>0.05)。

结论

与试验团注法相比,团注追踪法产生的强化更均匀。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验