ECG-gated Versus Non-ECG-gated High-pitch Dual-source CT for Whole Body CT Angiography (CTA).

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.