• William P Shuman, Jonathon A Leipsic, Janet M Busey, Douglas E Green, Sudhakar N Pipavath, Cameron J Hague, and Kent M Koprowicz.
• Department of Radiology, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 357115, Seattle, WA 98195, United States. wshuman@u.washington.edu
• Eur J Radiol. 2012 Sep 1; 81 (9): 2444-9.

ObjectiveTo compare prospectively ECG gated CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) with routine helical ungated CTPA for cardiac related motion artifacts and patient radiation dose.Subjects And MethodsTwenty patients with signs and symptoms suspicious for pulmonary embolism and who had a heart rate below 85 were scanned with prospectively ECG gated CTPA. These gated exams were matched for several clinical parameters to exams from twenty similar clinical patients scanned with routine ungated helical CTPA. Three blinded independent reviewers subjectively evaluated all exams for overall pulmonary artery enhancement and for several cardiac motion related artifacts, including vessel blurring, intravascular shading, and double line. Reviewers also measured pulmonary artery intravascular density and image noise. Patient radiation dose for each technique was compared. Fourteen clinical prospectively ECG gated CTPA exams from a second institution were evaluated for the same parameters.ResultsProspectively ECG gated CTPA resulted in significantly decreased motion-related image artifact scores in lung segments adjacent to the heart compared to ungated CTPA. Measured image noise was not significantly different between the two types of CTPA exams. Effective dose was 28% less for prospectively ECG gated CTPA (4.9 mSv versus 6.8 mSv, p=0.02). Similar results were found in the prospectively ECG gated exams from the second institution.ConclusionCompared to routine helical ungated CTPA, prospectively ECG gated CTPA may result in less cardiac related motion artifact in lung segments adjacent to the heart and significantly less patient radiation dose.Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…