Limits...
A systematic approach for analysis, interpretation, and reporting of coronary CTA studies.

Karlo CA, Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Glaser-Gallion N, Wildermuth S, Alkadhi H - Insights Imaging (2012)

Bottom Line: The secondary mainstay is represented by the correct analysis and interpretation of the acquired data, as well as reporting of the pertinent imaging findings to the referring physician.The latter process requires knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of various post-processing methods.By implementing various radiation dose reduction techniques, care needs to be taken to keep the radiation dose of coronary CTA as low as reasonably achievable while maintaining the diagnostic capacity of the examination.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.

ABSTRACT
Over the past years, the number of coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) studies performed worldwide has been steadily increasing. Performing a coronary CTA study with appropriate protocols tailored to the individual patient and clinical question is mandatory to obtain an image quality that is diagnostic for the study purpose. This process can be considered the primary mainstay of each coronary CTA study. The secondary mainstay is represented by the correct analysis and interpretation of the acquired data, as well as reporting of the pertinent imaging findings to the referring physician. The latter process requires knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of various post-processing methods. In addition, a standardized approach can be helpful to avoid false-positive and false-negative findings regarding the presence or absence of coronary artery disease. By implementing various radiation dose reduction techniques, care needs to be taken to keep the radiation dose of coronary CTA as low as reasonably achievable while maintaining the diagnostic capacity of the examination. This review describes a practical approach to the analysis and interpretation of coronary CTA data, including the standardized reporting of the relevant imaging findings to the referring physicians.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Left Contrast filling defect in the coronary artery that might be considered as obstructive coronary lesion. The absence of a visible plaque and the lack of clear differentiation of the filling defect from the adjacent pericardial tissue suggest this “lesion” to be an artefact. Right Clearly visible mixed plaque in the coronary artery. Perpendicular views (I–III) show clear distinction from the pericardial tissue
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369123&req=5

Fig9: Left Contrast filling defect in the coronary artery that might be considered as obstructive coronary lesion. The absence of a visible plaque and the lack of clear differentiation of the filling defect from the adjacent pericardial tissue suggest this “lesion” to be an artefact. Right Clearly visible mixed plaque in the coronary artery. Perpendicular views (I–III) show clear distinction from the pericardial tissue

Mentions: Another important issue for distinguishing motion artefacts from true lesions is that any plaque has to be entirely visible on the reconstructed images [38]. This means that the plaque should be differentiated from the surrounding pericardial tissue around its entire circumference (Fig. 9). Otherwise, the “lesion” is suspicious as an artefact.Fig. 9


A systematic approach for analysis, interpretation, and reporting of coronary CTA studies.

Karlo CA, Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Glaser-Gallion N, Wildermuth S, Alkadhi H - Insights Imaging (2012)

Left Contrast filling defect in the coronary artery that might be considered as obstructive coronary lesion. The absence of a visible plaque and the lack of clear differentiation of the filling defect from the adjacent pericardial tissue suggest this “lesion” to be an artefact. Right Clearly visible mixed plaque in the coronary artery. Perpendicular views (I–III) show clear distinction from the pericardial tissue
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369123&req=5

Fig9: Left Contrast filling defect in the coronary artery that might be considered as obstructive coronary lesion. The absence of a visible plaque and the lack of clear differentiation of the filling defect from the adjacent pericardial tissue suggest this “lesion” to be an artefact. Right Clearly visible mixed plaque in the coronary artery. Perpendicular views (I–III) show clear distinction from the pericardial tissue
Mentions: Another important issue for distinguishing motion artefacts from true lesions is that any plaque has to be entirely visible on the reconstructed images [38]. This means that the plaque should be differentiated from the surrounding pericardial tissue around its entire circumference (Fig. 9). Otherwise, the “lesion” is suspicious as an artefact.Fig. 9

Bottom Line: The secondary mainstay is represented by the correct analysis and interpretation of the acquired data, as well as reporting of the pertinent imaging findings to the referring physician.The latter process requires knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of various post-processing methods.By implementing various radiation dose reduction techniques, care needs to be taken to keep the radiation dose of coronary CTA as low as reasonably achievable while maintaining the diagnostic capacity of the examination.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.

ABSTRACT
Over the past years, the number of coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) studies performed worldwide has been steadily increasing. Performing a coronary CTA study with appropriate protocols tailored to the individual patient and clinical question is mandatory to obtain an image quality that is diagnostic for the study purpose. This process can be considered the primary mainstay of each coronary CTA study. The secondary mainstay is represented by the correct analysis and interpretation of the acquired data, as well as reporting of the pertinent imaging findings to the referring physician. The latter process requires knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of various post-processing methods. In addition, a standardized approach can be helpful to avoid false-positive and false-negative findings regarding the presence or absence of coronary artery disease. By implementing various radiation dose reduction techniques, care needs to be taken to keep the radiation dose of coronary CTA as low as reasonably achievable while maintaining the diagnostic capacity of the examination. This review describes a practical approach to the analysis and interpretation of coronary CTA data, including the standardized reporting of the relevant imaging findings to the referring physicians.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus