Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts

Autores
Carrascosa, Patricia M.; Cury, Ricardo C.; Deviggiano, Alejandro; Capunay, Carlos; Campisi, Roxana; López de Munain, Marina; Vallejos, Javier; Tajer, Carlos; Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo
Año de publicación
2015
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Rationale and objectives: We sought to explore the feasibility and diagnostic performance of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) versus single-energy computed tomography (SECT) for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with intermediate to high likelihood of coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: The present prospective study involved patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease referred for myocardial perfusion imaging by single-photon emission computed tomography. Forty patients were included in the study protocol and scanned using DECT imaging (n=20) or SECT imaging (n=20). The same pharmacologic stress was used for DECT, SECT, and single-photon emission computed tomography scans. Results: A total of 1360 left ventricular segments were evaluated by DECT and SECT. The contrast-to-noise ratio was similar between groups (DECT 8.8±2.9 vs. SECT 7.7±4.2; P = 22). The diagnostic performance of DECT was greater than that of SECT in identifying perfusion defects (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of DECT 0.90 [0.86-0.94] vs SECT 0.80 [0.76-0.84]; P = 0004) and remained unaffected when including only segments affected by beam-hardening artifacts (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=DECT 0.90 [0.84-0.96) vs. SECT 0.77 [0.69-0.84]; P = 007). Conclusions: Our results suggest that myocardial perfusion by DECT imaging is feasible and might have improved diagnostic performance compared to SECT imaging for the assessment of myocardial CT perfusion. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of DECT remained unaffected by the presence of beam-hardening artifacts.
Fil: Carrascosa, Patricia M.. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Cury, Ricardo C.. Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute; Estados Unidos. Baptist Hospital of Miami; Estados Unidos
Fil: Deviggiano, Alejandro. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Capunay, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Campisi, Roxana. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: López de Munain, Marina. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Vallejos, Javier. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Tajer, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
Computed Tomography
Dypiridamole
Spectral Imaging
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/38034
Acceder
id CONICETDig_27e62131fb39689cd21e8bde8f734fd4
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/38034
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifactsCarrascosa, Patricia M.Cury, Ricardo C.Deviggiano, AlejandroCapunay, CarlosCampisi, RoxanaLópez de Munain, MarinaVallejos, JavierTajer, CarlosRodriguez Granillo, Gaston AlfredoComputed TomographyDypiridamoleSpectral Imaginghttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.2https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3Rationale and objectives: We sought to explore the feasibility and diagnostic performance of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) versus single-energy computed tomography (SECT) for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with intermediate to high likelihood of coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: The present prospective study involved patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease referred for myocardial perfusion imaging by single-photon emission computed tomography. Forty patients were included in the study protocol and scanned using DECT imaging (n=20) or SECT imaging (n=20). The same pharmacologic stress was used for DECT, SECT, and single-photon emission computed tomography scans. Results: A total of 1360 left ventricular segments were evaluated by DECT and SECT. The contrast-to-noise ratio was similar between groups (DECT 8.8±2.9 vs. SECT 7.7±4.2; P = 22). The diagnostic performance of DECT was greater than that of SECT in identifying perfusion defects (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of DECT 0.90 [0.86-0.94] vs SECT 0.80 [0.76-0.84]; P = 0004) and remained unaffected when including only segments affected by beam-hardening artifacts (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=DECT 0.90 [0.84-0.96) vs. SECT 0.77 [0.69-0.84]; P = 007). Conclusions: Our results suggest that myocardial perfusion by DECT imaging is feasible and might have improved diagnostic performance compared to SECT imaging for the assessment of myocardial CT perfusion. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of DECT remained unaffected by the presence of beam-hardening artifacts.Fil: Carrascosa, Patricia M.. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Cury, Ricardo C.. Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute; Estados Unidos. Baptist Hospital of Miami; Estados UnidosFil: Deviggiano, Alejandro. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Capunay, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Campisi, Roxana. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: López de Munain, Marina. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Vallejos, Javier. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Tajer, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; ArgentinaFil: Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaElsevier Science Inc2015-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/mswordapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/38034Carrascosa, Patricia M.; Cury, Ricardo C.; Deviggiano, Alejandro; Capunay, Carlos; Campisi, Roxana; et al.; Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts; Elsevier Science Inc; Academic Radiology; 22; 5; 5-2015; 591-5991076-6332CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.019info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1076633215000094info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-03T10:08:50Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/38034instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-03 10:08:51.198CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
title Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
spellingShingle Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
Carrascosa, Patricia M.
Computed Tomography
Dypiridamole
Spectral Imaging
title_short Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
title_full Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
title_fullStr Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
title_sort Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Carrascosa, Patricia M.
Cury, Ricardo C.
Deviggiano, Alejandro
Capunay, Carlos
Campisi, Roxana
López de Munain, Marina
Vallejos, Javier
Tajer, Carlos
Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo
author Carrascosa, Patricia M.
author_facet Carrascosa, Patricia M.
Cury, Ricardo C.
Deviggiano, Alejandro
Capunay, Carlos
Campisi, Roxana
López de Munain, Marina
Vallejos, Javier
Tajer, Carlos
Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo
author_role author
author2 Cury, Ricardo C.
Deviggiano, Alejandro
Capunay, Carlos
Campisi, Roxana
López de Munain, Marina
Vallejos, Javier
Tajer, Carlos
Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Computed Tomography
Dypiridamole
Spectral Imaging
topic Computed Tomography
Dypiridamole
Spectral Imaging
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3.2
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/3
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Rationale and objectives: We sought to explore the feasibility and diagnostic performance of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) versus single-energy computed tomography (SECT) for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with intermediate to high likelihood of coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: The present prospective study involved patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease referred for myocardial perfusion imaging by single-photon emission computed tomography. Forty patients were included in the study protocol and scanned using DECT imaging (n=20) or SECT imaging (n=20). The same pharmacologic stress was used for DECT, SECT, and single-photon emission computed tomography scans. Results: A total of 1360 left ventricular segments were evaluated by DECT and SECT. The contrast-to-noise ratio was similar between groups (DECT 8.8±2.9 vs. SECT 7.7±4.2; P = 22). The diagnostic performance of DECT was greater than that of SECT in identifying perfusion defects (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of DECT 0.90 [0.86-0.94] vs SECT 0.80 [0.76-0.84]; P = 0004) and remained unaffected when including only segments affected by beam-hardening artifacts (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=DECT 0.90 [0.84-0.96) vs. SECT 0.77 [0.69-0.84]; P = 007). Conclusions: Our results suggest that myocardial perfusion by DECT imaging is feasible and might have improved diagnostic performance compared to SECT imaging for the assessment of myocardial CT perfusion. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of DECT remained unaffected by the presence of beam-hardening artifacts.
Fil: Carrascosa, Patricia M.. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Cury, Ricardo C.. Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute; Estados Unidos. Baptist Hospital of Miami; Estados Unidos
Fil: Deviggiano, Alejandro. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Capunay, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Campisi, Roxana. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: López de Munain, Marina. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Vallejos, Javier. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Tajer, Carlos. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina
Fil: Rodriguez Granillo, Gaston Alfredo. Diagnóstico Maipú; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description Rationale and objectives: We sought to explore the feasibility and diagnostic performance of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) versus single-energy computed tomography (SECT) for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with intermediate to high likelihood of coronary artery disease. Materials and Methods: The present prospective study involved patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease referred for myocardial perfusion imaging by single-photon emission computed tomography. Forty patients were included in the study protocol and scanned using DECT imaging (n=20) or SECT imaging (n=20). The same pharmacologic stress was used for DECT, SECT, and single-photon emission computed tomography scans. Results: A total of 1360 left ventricular segments were evaluated by DECT and SECT. The contrast-to-noise ratio was similar between groups (DECT 8.8±2.9 vs. SECT 7.7±4.2; P = 22). The diagnostic performance of DECT was greater than that of SECT in identifying perfusion defects (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of DECT 0.90 [0.86-0.94] vs SECT 0.80 [0.76-0.84]; P = 0004) and remained unaffected when including only segments affected by beam-hardening artifacts (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=DECT 0.90 [0.84-0.96) vs. SECT 0.77 [0.69-0.84]; P = 007). Conclusions: Our results suggest that myocardial perfusion by DECT imaging is feasible and might have improved diagnostic performance compared to SECT imaging for the assessment of myocardial CT perfusion. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of DECT remained unaffected by the presence of beam-hardening artifacts.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-05
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/38034
Carrascosa, Patricia M.; Cury, Ricardo C.; Deviggiano, Alejandro; Capunay, Carlos; Campisi, Roxana; et al.; Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts; Elsevier Science Inc; Academic Radiology; 22; 5; 5-2015; 591-599
1076-6332
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/38034
identifier_str_mv Carrascosa, Patricia M.; Cury, Ricardo C.; Deviggiano, Alejandro; Capunay, Carlos; Campisi, Roxana; et al.; Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy ct and effect of beam-hardening artifacts; Elsevier Science Inc; Academic Radiology; 22; 5; 5-2015; 591-599
1076-6332
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.019
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1076633215000094
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/msword
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier Science Inc
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier Science Inc
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1842270059754422272
score 13.13397

Publicaciones similares