Artifacts at Cardiac CT: Physics and Solutions

References

• 1. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56(22):1864–1894.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 2. Tops LF, Krishnàn SC, Schuijf JD, Schalij MJ, Bax JJ. Noncoronary applications of cardiac multidetector row computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1(1):94–106.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 3. Nasis A, Mottram PM, Cameron JD, Seneviratne SK. Current and evolving clinical applications of multidetector cardiac CT in assessment of structural heart disease. Radiology 2013;267(1):11–25.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 4. Danad I, Fayad ZA, Willemink MJ, Min JK. New applications of cardiac computed tomography: dual-energy, spectral, and molecular CT imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;8(6):710–723.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 5. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J 2010;31(3):340–346.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 6. Mahesh M, Cody DD. Physics of cardiac imaging with multiple-row detector CT. RadioGraphics 2007;27(5):1495–1509.
  Google Scholar
• 7. Wang Y, Vidan E, Bergman GW. Cardiac motion of coronary arteries: variability in the rest period and implications for coronary MR angiography. Radiology 1999;213(3):751–758.
  Google Scholar
• 8. Hassan A, Nazir SA, Alkadhi H. Technical challenges of coronary CT angiography: today and tomorrow. Eur J Radiol 2011;79(2):161–171.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 9. Meng L, Cui L, Cheng Y, et al. Effect of heart rate and coronary calcification on the diagnostic accuracy of the dual-source CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Korean J Radiol 2009;10(4):347–354.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 10. Dewey M, Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Patient characteristics as predictors of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of MDCT compared with conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery stenoses: CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(1):93–102.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 11. Stolzmann P, Goetti RP, Maurovich-Horvat P, et al. Predictors of image quality in high-pitch coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197(4):851–858.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 12. Choi HS, Choi BW, Choe KO, et al. Pitfalls, artifacts, and remedies in multi–detector row CT coronary angiography. RadioGraphics 2004;24(3):787–800.
  Google Scholar
• 13. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Holle J, Muschiol G, Daniel WG, Moshage W. In-plane coronary arterial motion velocity: measurement with electron-beam CT. Radiology 2000;216(2):457–463.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 14. Lesser JR, Flygenring BJ, Knickelbine T, Longe T, Schwartz RS. Practical approaches to overcoming artifacts in coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3(1):4–15.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 15. Ghostine S, Caussin C, Daoud B, et al. Non-invasive detection of coronary artery disease in patients with left bundle branch block using 64-slice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(10):1929–1934.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 16. Herzog C, Arning-Erb M, Zangos S, et al. Multi–detector row CT coronary angiography: influence of reconstruction technique and heart rate on image quality. Radiology 2006;238(1):75–86.
  Google Scholar
• 17. Mahabadi AA, Achenbach S, Burgstahler C, et al. Safety, efficacy, and indications of β-adrenergic receptor blockade to reduce heart rate prior to coronary CT angiography. Radiology 2010;257(3):614–623.
  Google Scholar
• 18. Abbara S, Arbab-Zadeh A, Callister TQ, et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3(3):190–204.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 19. Hsiao EM, Rybicki FJ, Steigner M. CT coronary angiography: 256-slice and 320-detector row scanners. Curr Cardiol Rep 2010;12(1):68–75.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 20. Sun G, Li M, Jiang XS, et al. 320-detector row CT coronary angiography: effects of heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality, diagnostic accuracy and radiation exposure. Br J Radiol 2012;85(1016):e388–e394.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 21. Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24(5):535–546.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 22. Qin J, Liu LY, Fang Y, et al. 320-detector CT coronary angiography with prospective and retrospective electrocardiogram gating in a single heartbeat: comparison of image quality and radiation dose. Br J Radiol 2012;85(1015):945–951.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 23. Stassi D, Dutta S, Ma H, et al. Automated selection of the optimal cardiac phase for single-beat coronary CT angiography reconstruction. Med Phys 2016;43(1):324.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 24. Achenbach S, Goroll T, Seltmann M, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by low-dose, prospectively ECG-triggered, high-pitch spiral coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4(4):328–337.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 25. Deseive S, Pugliese F, Meave A, et al. Image quality and radiation dose of a prospectively electrocardiography-triggered high-pitch data acquisition strategy for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, randomized PROTECTION IV study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2015;9(4):278–285.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 26. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Schepis T, et al. High-pitch spiral acquisition: a new scan mode for coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3(2):117–121.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 27. Schöndube H, Allmendinger T, Stierstorfer K, Bruder H, Flohr T. Temporal resolution and motion artifacts in single-source and dual-source cardiac CT. Med Phys 2013;40(3):031112.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 28. Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, et al. First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 2006;16(2):256–268.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 29. Halliburton SS, Rajiah P. Cardiac CT scanner technology: what is new and what is next? Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 2016;9:8.
  Google Scholar
• 30. Ranallo FN, Szczykutowicz T. The correct selection of pitch for optimal CT scanning: avoiding common misconceptions. J Am Coll Radiol 2015;12(4):423–424.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 31. Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, et al. Current and novel imaging techniques in coronary CT. RadioGraphics 2015;35(4):991–1010.
  Google Scholar
• 32. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Hague CJ, et al. Effect of a novel vendor-specific motion-correction algorithm on image quality and diagnostic accuracy in persons undergoing coronary CT angiography without rate-control medications. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2012;6(3):164–171.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 33. Min JK, Arsanjani R, Kurabayashi S, et al. Rationale and design of the ViCTORY (Validation of an Intracycle CT Motion CORrection Algorithm for Diagnostic AccuracY) trial. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2013;7(3):200–206.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 34. Takayanagi T, Sano T, Kondo T, et al. Clinical usefulness of low tube current scanning with full reconstruction and automatic patient motion correction (APMC) reconstruction in a prospective ECG-gated coronary CT angiography using 320-row area detector CT [in Japanese]. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2015;71(3):237–245.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 35. Kröpil P, Rojas CA, Ghoshhajra B, et al. Prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition for cardiac CT angiography in routine clinical practice: initial results. J Thorac Imaging 2012;27(3):194–201.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 36. Halliburton SS, Abbara S. Practical tips and tricks in cardiovascular computed tomography: patient preparation for optimization of cardiovascular CT data acquisition. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2007;1(1):62–65.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 37. Hecht HS, Bhatti T. How much calcium is too much calcium for coronary computerized tomographic angiography? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2008;2(3):183–187.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 38. Yu L, Leng S, McCollough CH. Dual-energy CT-based monochromatic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199 (5 suppl):S9–S15.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 39. Henzler T, Fink C, Schoenberg SO, Schoepf UJ.Dual-energy CT: radiation dose aspects. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199 (5 suppl):S16–S25.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 40. Li K, Garrett J, Ge Y, Chen GH. Statistical model based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) in clinical CT systems. II. Experimental assessment of spatial resolution performance. Med Phys 2014;41(7):071911.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 41. Kumamaru KK, Hoppel BE, Mather RT, Rybicki FJ. CT angiography: current technology and clinical use. Radiol Clin North Am 2010;48(2):213–235, vii.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 42. Boas FE, Fleischmann D. CT artifacts: causes and reduction techniques. Imaging Med 2012;4(2):229–240.
  Google Scholar
• 43. Stolzmann P, Winklhofer S, Schwendener N, Alkadhi H, Thali MJ, Ruder TD. Monoenergetic computed tomography reconstructions reduce beam hardening artifacts from dental restorations. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 2013;9(3):327–332.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 44. Hsieh J, Molthen RC, Dawson CA, Johnson RH. An iterative approach to the beam hardening correction in cone beam CT. Med Phys 2000;27(1):23–29.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 45. Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. RadioGraphics 2004;24(6):1679–1691.
  Google Scholar
• 46. Zhang X, Wang J, Xing L. Metal artifact reduction in x-ray computed tomography (CT) by constrained optimization. Med Phys 2011;38(2):701–711.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 47. Modica MJ, Kanal KM, Gunn ML. The obese emergency patient: imaging challenges and solutions. RadioGraphics 2011;31(3):811–823.
  Google Scholar
• 48. Ghoshhajra BB, Engel LC, Károlyi M, et al. Cardiac computed tomography angiography with automatic tube potential selection: effects on radiation dose and image quality. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28(1):40–48.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 49. McCollough CH. Re: maximizing dose reductions with cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25(6):647.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 50. Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Zhang J, Fletcher JG. Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi–detector row CT. RadioGraphics 2006;26(6):1785–1794.
  Google Scholar
• 51. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34(11):4526–4544.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 52. Singh S, Khawaja RD, Pourjabbar S, Padole A, Lira D, Kalra MK. Iterative image reconstruction and its role in cardiothoracic computed tomography. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28(6):355–367.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 53. Willemink MJ, de Jong PA, Leiner T, et al. Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography. I. Technical principles. Eur Radiol 2013;23(6):1623–1631.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 54. Nelson RC, Feuerlein S, Boll DT. New iterative reconstruction techniques for cardiovascular computed tomography: how do they work, and what are the advantages and disadvantages? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2011;5(5):286–292.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 55. Yan RT, Miller JM, Rochitte CE, et al. Predictors of inaccurate coronary arterial stenosis assessment by CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6(9):963–972.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 56. Scheske JA, O’Brien JM, Earls JP, et al. Coronary artery imaging with single-source rapid kilovolt peak-switching dual-energy CT. Radiology 2013;268(3):702–709.
  Google Scholar
• 57. Taylor CM, Blum A, Abbara S. Patient preparation and scanning techniques. Radiol Clin North Am 2010;48(4):675–686.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 58. Primak AN, Dong Y, Dzyubak OP, Jorgensen SM, McCollough CH, Ritman EL. A technical solution to avoid partial scan artifacts in cardiac MDCT. Med Phys 2007;34(12):4726–4737.
  Medline Google Scholar
• 59. Tao Y, Speidel M, Szczykutowicz T, Chen GH. Investigation of the potential causes of partial scan artifacts in dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging. In: Whiting BR, Hoeschen C, eds. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 2014—physics of medical imaging. Vol 9033. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2014;90332B.
  Google Scholar