HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Choi, H. S. Articles by Kim, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Choi, H. S. Articles by Kim, J. Related Collections Cardiac Radiology Computed Tomography

Pitfalls, Artifacts, and Remedies in Multi– Detector Row CT Coronary Angiography¹

¹ From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science (H.S.C., B.W.C., K.O.C., M.I.K., J.K.), Cardiology Division, Cardiovascular Center (D.C.), and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cardiovascular Center (K.J.Y.), Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Received February 3, 2003; revision requested March 24 and received May 13; accepted October 1. Address correspondence to B.W.C., Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 134 Sinchon-dong, Seodaemoon-gu, Seoul 120–752, South Korea (e-mail: bchoi@yumc.yonsei.ac.kr).

Coronary angiography is increasingly performed with multi–detector row computed tomography (CT) in the clinical setting. Successful use of this method, however, depends on the radiologist’s knowledge of its potential pitfalls and familiarity with methods for minimizing or avoiding them. To identify artifacts and other pitfalls that commonly degrade image quality and that could result in misinterpretation, contrast-enhanced coronary angiograms acquired with a multi–detector row CT scanner with four detector rows in 110 consecutive patients were analyzed. The problems identified were classified into four broad categories: (a) motion-related artifacts caused by cardiac, pulmonary, or other body motion; (b) beam-hardening effects caused by metallic implants, severe calcifications, or air bubbles in the pulmonary artery that obscured the underlying coronary vessel lumen; (c) structural artifacts produced by adjacent contrast material–filled structures and overlying vessels; and (d) artifacts that resulted from technical errors or limitations. The most frequently observed artifacts were those related to cardiac motion. The most effective methods for minimizing cardiac motion artifacts are (a) premedication with ß-blockers to maintain optimal heart rate during scanning and (b) optimal selection of the reconstruction window.

© RSNA, 2004

Index Terms: Angiography, comparative studies, 54.1244 • Computed tomography (CT), artifact, 54.12119 • Computed tomography (CT), multi–detector row, 54.12113 • Coronary vessels, bypass graft, 54.4553, 54.4558 • Coronary vessels, CT, 54.12116, 54.12117

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. N. Shetty, K. G. Bis, A. R. Vyas, A. Kumar, A. Anderson, and M. Balasubramaniam Contrast Volume Reduction with Superior Vena Cava Catheter-Directed Coronary CT Angiography: Comparison with Peripheral IV Contrast Enhancement in a Swine Model Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): W247 - W254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Stangl, V. Witzel, G. Baumann, and K. Stangl Current diagnostic concepts to detect coronary artery disease in women Eur. Heart J., March 2, 2008; 29(6): 707 - 717. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Abdulla, S. Z. Abildstrom, O. Gotzsche, E. Christensen, L. Kober, and C. Torp-Pedersen 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis Eur. Heart J., December 2, 2007; 28(24): 3042 - 3050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Mahesh and D. D. Cody AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Physics of Cardiac Imaging with Multiple-Row Detector CT RadioGraphics, September 1, 2007; 27(5): 1495 - 1509. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. D. Raptopoulos, P. B. Boiselle, N. Michailidis, J. Handwerker, A. Sabir, J. A. Edlow, I. Pedrosa, and J. B. Kruskal MDCT Angiography of Acute Chest Pain: Evaluation of ECG-Gated and Nongated Techniques Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2006; 186(6_Supplement_2): S346 - S356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Pugliese, F. Cademartiri, C. van Mieghem, W. B. Meijboom, P. Malagutti, N. R. A. Mollet, C. Martinoli, P. J. de Feyter, and G. P. Krestin Multidetector CT for visualization of coronary stents. RadioGraphics, May 1, 2006; 26(3): 887 - 904. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Schwaiger, S. Ziegler, and S. G. Nekolla PET/CT: Challenge for Nuclear Cardiology J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2005; 46(10): 1664 - 1678. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. K. Fishman Multidetector-row computed tomography to detect coronary artery disease: the importance of heart rate Eur. Heart J. Suppl., August 1, 2005; 7(suppl_G): G4 - G12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Bertrand, F. Esteve, H. Elleaume, C. Nemoz, S. Fiedler, A. Bravin, G. Berruyer, T. Brochard, M. Renier, J. Machecourt, et al. Comparison of synchrotron radiation angiography with conventional angiography for the diagnosis of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty Eur. Heart J., July 1, 2005; 26(13): 1284 - 1291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]