Search

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) and of three-dimensional (3D) navigator magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients referred for conventional coronary angiography for detection of coronary artery stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients gave written informed consent for the study, which was approved by the local ethics committee. Twenty-seven patients underwent multi-detector row CT and 3D navigator free-breathing MR imaging a mean of 5 days before undergoing invasive coronary angiography. The acquired multi-detector row CT and MR images were graded for the presence of greater than 50% stenosis in vessels larger than 1.5 mm in diameter. The diagnostic accuracies of the two examinations were compared with that of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) by using the McNemar test. RESULTS: Owing to claustrophobia, MR images were not acquired in one patient; thus, 26 patients were included for analysis. According to QCA findings, 21 of the 26 patients had significant coronary artery disease and 58 (20%) of a total of 294 coronary artery segments larger than 1.5 mm in diameter had significant (>50%) stenosis. Multi-detector row CT had significantly higher sensitivity (46 [79%] of 58 segments) than MR imaging (36 [62%] segments, P < .05) for detection of segments with significant stenosis. Conversely, MR imaging had significantly higher specificity (198 [84%] of 236 segments) than did CT (168 [71%] segments, P < .001) for exclusion of segmental coronary artery stenosis. Both examinations had high negative predictive value for exclusion of segmental stenosis: 93% (168 of 180 segments) for CT and 90% (198 of 220 segments) for MR imaging. The overall diagnostic accuracy of MR imaging (80% [234 of 294 segments]) was significantly higher than that of CT (73% [214 segments], P < .05). CONCLUSION: MR imaging had significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than multi-detector row CT in the evaluation of coronary artery stenosis. Both techniques have high negative predictive value, making them particularly useful for ruling out coronary artery disease in symptomatic patients.

PURPOSE: To compare multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) and ventilation-perfusion (V-P) scintigraphy in the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) in outpatients who were cared for in the emergency department. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four nonconsecutive patients, in whom acute PE was suspected, underwent thin-collimation multi-detector row CT (collimation, 4 x 1 mm; pitch, 1.25; scanning time, 0.5 second) and V-P scintigraphy. Concordance between CT and scintigraphic images was used in the diagnosis of PE. Pulmonary angiography was performed within 24 hours if interpretations of V-P and spiral CT images were inconclusive or discordant. Sensitivity and specificity values were calculated for V-P scintigrams and CT scans of the lungs. The rates of conclusive results for scintigraphy and CT were compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity of thin-collimation multi-detector row CT and V-P scintigraphy for the detection of PE was 96% (27 of 28; CI: 82%, 99%) and 98% (65 of 66; CI: 92%, 99%), respectively. The specificity of CT and V-P scintigraphy was 86% (24 of 28; CI: 67%, 96%) and 88% (58 of 66; CI: 77%, 94%), respectively. Seven V-P scintigrams were of intermediate probability, and one spiral CT study was indeterminate. Examinations with spiral CT yielded conclusive results more often than examinations with planar V-P scintigraphy (P

PURPOSE: To compare radiation dose delivered at four- and 16-detector row computed tomography (CT) with a dose-modulation program and that delivered at digital angiography for evaluation of pulmonary embolism (PE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The part of the study involving patients (seven women, four men; mean age, 62 years +/- 16 [standard deviation]; range, 41-85 years) was approved by the institutional review board. Patients gave written informed consent. Exposure was performed with an anthropomorphic phantom with thermoluminescent dosimeters for four-detector row CT without the dose-modulation program and 16-detector row CT without and with the dose-modulation program with standard protocols for pulmonary CT angiography (120 kV, 144 mAs, four and 16 detector rows with 1.00- and 0.75-mm section thickness, respectively). Digital angiograms were acquired with four standard projections at 80 kV. For digital angiography, radiation dose was calculated according to phantom measurements and adapted to acquisition and fluoroscopy times. Distribution of dose was compared for CT and digital angiography. RESULTS: During pulmonary CT angiography, mean radiation dose delivered at middle of chest was 21.5, 19.5, and 18.2 mGy for four-detector row CT and for 16-detector row CT without and with dose-modulation program, respectively. At the same level, a mean dose of 91 mGy was delivered with digital angiography. The dose adjusted to clinical conditions was 139.0 mGy for digital angiography and could be reduced after technical adjustment. Ratios of maximum dose to mean dose were 1.15 and 2.96 for CT and digital angiography, respectively. With application of the dose-modulation program at 16-detector row CT, radiation dose was reduced 15%-20% at the upper chest. CONCLUSION: Multi-detector row CT delivers a lower radiation dose, with better spatial distribution of dose, than does pulmonary CT angiography. With 16-detector row CT and a dose-modulation program, radiation dose is decreased during PE work-up.