"skipMainNavigation"
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Radiology
Menu
Previous
Next
Vascular and Interventional Radiology

Aorta and Iliac Arteries: Single versus Multiple Detector-Row Helical CT Angiography

Published Online:Jun 1 2000https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn18670

Abstract

PURPOSE: To comparesingle- versus four-channel helical computed tomographic (CT) aortography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients with aortic aneurysm or dissection underwent four- and one-channel CT angiography. Scan pairs covered the thoracic inlet to the diaphragm (n = 10) and supraceliac abdominal aorta (n = 19) or thoracic inlet (n = 19) to the femoral arterial bifurcations. For four-channel CT, nominal section thickness and pitch were 2.5 mm and 6.0, respectively, and for one-channel CT, 3.0 mm and 2.0 to the infrarenal aorta and 5.0 mm and 2.0 to the femoral arteries. Effective section thickness, scanning duration, scanning coverage, dose of iodinated contrast material, and mean aortoiliac attenuation were compared. Data were summarized as speed (coverage/duration), scanning efficiency (speed/section thickness), and contrast efficiency (mean aortic attenuation/dose of contrast material).

RESULTS: At four- versus one-channel CT, CT angiography was 2.6 times faster, scanning efficiency was 4.1 times greater, contrast efficiency was 2.5 times greater, dose of contrast material was reduced (mean, 57%; 97 vs 232 mL) without a significantchange in aortic enhancement, and sections were thinner (mean, 40%; 3.2 vs 5.3 mm) despite a 59% shorter scanning duration (22 vs 56 seconds).

CONCLUSION: Substantially reduced doses of contrast medium, shorter scanning durations, and narrower effective sections result withfour- versus one-channel CT aortography. No advantages of one-channel CT aortography were demonstrated.

References

  • 1 Rubin GD, Dake MD, Napel SA, McDonnell CH, Jeffrey RBJ. Abdominal spiral CT angiography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 1993; 186:147-152.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Rubin GD, Paik DS, Johnston PC, Napel S. Measurement of the aorta and its branches with helical CT. Radiology 1998; 206:823-829.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Van Hoe L, Baert AL, Gryspeerdt S, et al. Supra- and juxtarenal aneurysms of the abdominal aorta: preoperative assessment with thin–section spiral CT. Radiology 1996; 198:443-448.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Kaatee R, Beek FJ, de Lange EE, et al. Renal artery stenosis: detection and quantification with spiral CT angiography versus optimized digital subtraction angiography. Radiology 1997; 205:121-127.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Armerding MA, Rubin GD, Beaulieu CF, et al. Aortic aneurysmal disease: assessment of stent-graft treatment—CT versus conventional angiography. Radiology 2000; 215:138-146.
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Rubin GD, Armerding MD, Dake MD, Napel S. Cost identification of abdominal aortic aneurysm imaging by using time and motion analyses. Radiology 2000; 215:63-70.
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Katz DS, Jorgensen MJ, Rubin GD. Detection and follow-up of important extra-arterial lesions with helical CT angiography. Clin Radiol 1999; 54:294-300.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 8 Rubin GD, Shiau MC, Schmidt AJ, et al. Computed tomographic angiography: historical perspective and new state-of-the-art using multi detector-row helical computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23(suppl 1):S83-S90.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 9 Hu H. Multi-slice helical CT: scan and reconstruction. Med Phys 1999; 26:5-18.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 10 Rubin GD, Silverman SG. Helical CT of the retroperitoneum. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33:903-932.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 11 Rubin GD, Walker PJ, Dake MD, et al. 3D spiral CT angiography: an alternative imaging modality for the abdominal aorta and its branches. J Vasc Surg 1993; 18:656-666.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 12 Rubin GD, Napel SA, Ringl H, Brosnan TJ. Assessment of section profile and clinical images in helical CT with pitch values of 0.5–3.0 by using 180° linear extrapolation and segmented reconstruction (abstr). Radiology 1996; 201(P):246.
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Polacin A, Kalender WA, Marchal G. Evaluation of section sensitivity profiles and image noise in spiral CT. Radiology 1992; 185:29-35.
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Rubin GD, Napel S. Increased scan pitch for vascular and thoracic spiral CT. Radiology 1995; 197:316-317.
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Fishman EK. High-resolution three-dimensional imaging from subsecond helical CT data sets: applications in vascular imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:441-443.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 16 Rubin GD, Leung AN, Robertson VJ, Stark P. Thoracic spiral CT: influence of subsecond gantry rotation on image quality. Radiology 1998; 208:771-776.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Dillon EH, van Leeuwen MS, Fernandez MA, Mali WP. Spiral CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993; 160:1273-1278.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 18 Raptopoulos V, Rosen MP, Kent KC, Kuestner LM, Sheiman RG, Pearlman JD. Sequential helical CT angiography of aortoiliac disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166:1347-1354.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 19 Hopper KD, Mosher TJ, Kasales CJ, TenHave TR, Tully DA, Weaver JS. Thoracic spiral CT: delivery of contrast material pushed with injectable saline solution in a power injector. Radiology 1997; 205:269-271.
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Rubin GD, Lane MJ, Bloch DA, Leung AN, Stark P. Optimization of thoracic spiral CT: effects of iodinated contrast medium concentration. Radiology 1996; 201:785-791[Erratum: Radiology 1997; 205:288.].
    Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: June 2000