ArticleBMC medical imaging2014
Influence of trigger type, tube voltage and heart rate on calcified plaque imaging in dual source cardiac computed tomography: phantom study.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Diagnostic Performance of Coronary CT Angiography for the Assessment of Coronary Stenosis in Calcified Plaque.PloS one · 2016Trial
- 4D CT acquisition methods and their anticipated effects on image quality in dynamic CT-scanning of the wrist.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- Quantification of uncertainty in the assessment of coronary plaque in CCTA through a dynamic cardiac phantom and 3D-printed plaque model.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate the impact of high pitch cardiac CT vs. retrospective ECG gated CT on the quantification of calcified vessel stenoses, with assessment of the influence of tube voltage, reconstruction kernel and heart rate.
methodsA 4D cardiac movement phantom equipped with three different plaque phantoms (12.5%, 25% and 50% stenosis at different calcification levels), was scanned with a 128-row dual source CT scanner, applying different trigger types (gated vs. prospectively triggered high pitch), tube voltages (100-120 kV) and heart rates (50-90 beats per minute, bpm). Images were reconstructed using different standard (B26f, B46f, B70f) and iterative (I26f, I70f) convolution kernels. Absolute and relative plaque sizes were measured and statistically compared. Radiation dose associated with the different methods (gated vs. high pitch, 100 kV vs. 120 kV) were compared.
resultsCompared to the known diameters of the phantom plaques and vessels both CT-examination techniques overestimated the degrees of stenoses. Using the high pitch CT-protocol plaques appeared larger (0.09 ± 0.31 mm, 2 ± 8 percent points, PP) in comparison to the ECG-gated CT-scans. Reducing tube voltage had a similar effect, resulting in higher grading of the same stenoses by 3 ± 8 PP. In turn, sharper convolution kernels lead to a lower grading of stenoses (differences of up to 5%). Pairwise comparison of B26f and I26f, B46f and B70f, and B70f and I70f showed differences of 0-1 ± 6-8 PP of the plaque depiction. Motion artifacts were present only at 90 bpm high pitch experiments. High-pitch protocols were associated with significantly lower radiation doses compared with the ECG-gated protocols (258.0 mGy vs. 2829.8 mGy CTDIvol, p ≤ 0.0001).
conclusionProspectively triggered high-pitch cardiac CT led to an overestimation of plaque diameter and degree of stenoses in a coronary phantom. This overestimation is only slight and probably negligible in a clinical situation. Even at higher heart rates high pitch CT-scanning allowed reliable measurements of plaque and vessel diameters with only slight differences compared ECG-gated protocols, although motion artifacts were present at 90 bpm using the high pitch protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.