Effect of a standardized radiation dose reduction protocol on diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomographic angiography

Troy M. Labounty, Jonathon Leipsic, G. B.John Mancini, Brett Heilbron, Smita Patel, Ella A. Kazerooni, Baskaran Sundaram, Fay Y. Lin, Allison Dunning, Adam J. Saltzman, Giora Weisz, Jonathan W. Weinsaft, Jin Ho Choi, Sunaina Koduru, James K. Min

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although numerous strategies for radiation dose decrease in coronary computed tomographic angiography are effective, their combined impact on diagnostic performance is not known. We therefore assessed the effect of a standardized coronary computed tomographic angiographic protocol on diagnostic accuracy. We evaluated 80 consecutive patients from 3 sites with coronary computed tomographic angiography and quantitative coronary angiography. All sites initially used nonstandardized protocols; 2 sites then initiated a standardized protocol, and 1 site continued its nonstandardized protocol as a time-overlapping control. Two blinded readers interpreted coronary computed tomographic angiographic studies; a third obtained consensus. A blinded core laboratory performed quantitative coronary angiography. Each segment was graded as <50% or ≥50% diameter stenosis. Compared to those using nonstandardized protocols (n = 35), studies using standardized protocols (n = 45) had a trend to increased use of prospective gating (p = 0.09), lower voltage (p <0.01), decreased current (p <0.01), and shorter scan length (p <0.01). Median (interquartile range) radiation dose decreased from 5.7 mSv (4.0 to 10.8) to 2.0 mSv (1.3 to 3.4, p <0.001). There were no significant differences in sensitivity (100%, 20 of 20, vs 100%, 18 of 18, p = 1.0), specificity (93%, 14 of 15, vs 85%, 23 of 27, p = 0.61), or accuracy (97%, 34 of 35, vs 91%, 41 of 45, p = 0.27) by patient; sensitivity (83%, 33 of 40, vs 83%, 25 of 30, p = 0.93), specificity (92%, 86 of 93, vs 92%, 134 of 146, p = 0.85), or accuracy (89%, 119 of 133, vs 90%, 159 of 176, p = 0.80) by artery; or sensitivity (80%, 44 of 55, vs 72%, 26 of 36, p = 0.74), specificity (94%, 332 of 353, vs 94%, 499 of 531, p = 0.96), or accuracy (92%, 376 of 408, vs 93%, 525 of 567, p = 0.80) by segment. In conclusion, a standardized dose-decrease protocol for coronary computed tomographic angiography decreases radiation dose without affecting diagnostic performance.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)287-292
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume106
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 15 Jul 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of a standardized radiation dose reduction protocol on diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomographic angiography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this