Supported bridge position in one-stop coronary and craniocervical CT angiography: A randomized clinical trial.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1002/acm2.14561
Heng Zhou, Cheng Yan, Min Ji, Zhang Shi, Chun Yang, Mengsu Zeng
{"title":"Supported bridge position in one-stop coronary and craniocervical CT angiography: A randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Heng Zhou, Cheng Yan, Min Ji, Zhang Shi, Chun Yang, Mengsu Zeng","doi":"10.1002/acm2.14561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The routine patient arm position differs between coronary CT angiography (CTA) and craniocervical CTA protocols. To investigate the clinical feasibility of supported bridge position (SBP) in combined coronary and craniocervical CTA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective enrollment included patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) or craniocervical artery disease (CCAD) from February 2022 to November 2022. Patients were divided into three groups: coronary or craniocervical CTA according to CAD or CCAD using standard position (group 1), combined CTA with naturally arm-down position (group 2) and SBP (group 3). Statistical analysis of objective image quality, such as noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), subjective image quality, patient position and radiation dose was performed among the three groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and one patients (median age, 67 years; 138 men) were included. In terms of CNR for cardiac segment, group 1 and group 3 had no statistical difference, both significantly higher than group 2 (group 1, 12.56 ± 2.05; group 2, 10.4 ± 2.43; group 3, 11.94 ± 2.22; P < 0.05). Subjective image evaluation revealed no statistically significant differences among the three groups of coronary arteries (P > 0.05). Additionally, the lateral project value of scout images at the heart level indicated a significant difference (119.48 ± 12.19, 182.34 ± 25.09, and 140.58 ± 19.68 of patients, for group 1, group 2, and group 3, respectively, P < 0.05). No statistical differences were observed in <math> <semantics><msub><mi>CTDI</mi> <mi>vol</mi></msub> <annotation>${\\mathrm{CTDI}}_{{\\mathrm{vol}}}$</annotation></semantics> </math> between group 1 and group 3 (cardiac scan, 15.77 [15.07-16.37] mGy vs. 14.88 [12.19-18.81] mGy; craniocervical scan, 7.85 [7.69-8.01] mGy vs. 7.88 [7.88-7.89] mGy; all P > 0.05). However, group 2 had a higher dose (19.54 [16.86-22.85] mGy and 10.87 [10.86-10.87] mGy, for cardiac and craniocervical scans, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In comparison with a naturally arm-down position, SBP, which aligns the humerus bones with the spinal column, can provide diagnostic image quality at routine dose level of standard position CTA.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14561","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The routine patient arm position differs between coronary CT angiography (CTA) and craniocervical CTA protocols. To investigate the clinical feasibility of supported bridge position (SBP) in combined coronary and craniocervical CTA.

Methods: Prospective enrollment included patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) or craniocervical artery disease (CCAD) from February 2022 to November 2022. Patients were divided into three groups: coronary or craniocervical CTA according to CAD or CCAD using standard position (group 1), combined CTA with naturally arm-down position (group 2) and SBP (group 3). Statistical analysis of objective image quality, such as noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), subjective image quality, patient position and radiation dose was performed among the three groups.

Results: Two hundred and one patients (median age, 67 years; 138 men) were included. In terms of CNR for cardiac segment, group 1 and group 3 had no statistical difference, both significantly higher than group 2 (group 1, 12.56 ± 2.05; group 2, 10.4 ± 2.43; group 3, 11.94 ± 2.22; P < 0.05). Subjective image evaluation revealed no statistically significant differences among the three groups of coronary arteries (P > 0.05). Additionally, the lateral project value of scout images at the heart level indicated a significant difference (119.48 ± 12.19, 182.34 ± 25.09, and 140.58 ± 19.68 of patients, for group 1, group 2, and group 3, respectively, P < 0.05). No statistical differences were observed in CTDI vol ${\mathrm{CTDI}}_{{\mathrm{vol}}}$ between group 1 and group 3 (cardiac scan, 15.77 [15.07-16.37] mGy vs. 14.88 [12.19-18.81] mGy; craniocervical scan, 7.85 [7.69-8.01] mGy vs. 7.88 [7.88-7.89] mGy; all P > 0.05). However, group 2 had a higher dose (19.54 [16.86-22.85] mGy and 10.87 [10.86-10.87] mGy, for cardiac and craniocervical scans, respectively).

Conclusions: In comparison with a naturally arm-down position, SBP, which aligns the humerus bones with the spinal column, can provide diagnostic image quality at routine dose level of standard position CTA.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一站式冠状动脉和头颈部 CT 血管造影中的支撑桥位:随机临床试验。
目的:冠状动脉CT血管造影(CTA)和颅颈部CTA方案的常规患者手臂位置不同。目的:研究在冠状动脉和颅颈部联合 CTA 中采用支撑桥位(SBP)的临床可行性:方法:2022 年 2 月至 2022 年 11 月期间,前瞻性招募了疑似冠状动脉疾病(CAD)或颅颈动脉疾病(CCAD)患者。患者被分为三组:根据CAD或CCAD使用标准体位的冠状动脉或颅颈部CTA(第1组)、使用自然臂下位的联合CTA(第2组)和SBP(第3组)。对三组患者的客观图像质量(如噪声和对比噪声比(CNR))、主观图像质量、患者体位和辐射剂量进行了统计分析:结果:共纳入 201 名患者(中位年龄 67 岁,138 名男性)。就心脏节段的 CNR 而言,第 1 组和第 3 组无统计学差异,均显著高于第 2 组(第 1 组,12.56 ± 2.05;第 2 组,10.4 ± 2.43;第 3 组,11.94 ± 2.22;P 0.05)。此外,心脏水平的探查图像的横向投影值显示出显著差异(119.48±12.19,182.34±25.09,140.58±19.68的患者,分别为第1组、第2组和第3组,第1组和第3组之间的P CTDI vol ${{mathrm{CTDI}}_{{mathrm{vol}}}$(心脏扫描,15.77 [15.07-16.37] mGy vs. 14.88 [12.19-18.81] mGy;颅颈扫描,7.85 [7.69-8.01] mGy vs. 7.88 [7.88-7.89] mGy;所有 P > 0.05)。然而,第2组的剂量更高(心脏扫描和颅颈扫描的剂量分别为19.54 [16.86-22.85] mGy和10.87 [10.86-10.87] mGy):结论:与手臂自然下垂的体位相比,使肱骨与脊柱对齐的SBP能以标准体位CTA的常规剂量水平提供诊断图像质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
19.00%
发文量
331
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic
期刊最新文献
Machine learning in image-based outcome prediction after radiotherapy: A review. Attention 3D UNET for dose distribution prediction of high-dose-rate brachytherapy of cervical cancer: Intracavitary applicators. Supported bridge position in one-stop coronary and craniocervical CT angiography: A randomized clinical trial. Deep learning based ultra-low dose fan-beam computed tomography image enhancement algorithm: Feasibility study in image quality for radiotherapy. Surrogate gating strategies for the Elekta Unity MR-Linac gating system.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1