Low Contrast and Low kV CTA Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.

Spencer C Lacy, Mina M Benjamin, Mohammed Osman, Mushabbar A Syed, Menhel Kinno
{"title":"Low Contrast and Low kV CTA Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Spencer C Lacy,&nbsp;Mina M Benjamin,&nbsp;Mohammed Osman,&nbsp;Mushabbar A Syed,&nbsp;Menhel Kinno","doi":"10.4250/jcvi.2022.0108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Minimizing contrast dose and radiation exposure while maintaining image quality during computed tomography angiography (CTA) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is desirable, but not well established. This systematic review compares image quality for low contrast and low kV CTA versus conventional CTA in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic literature review to identify clinical studies comparing imaging strategies for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning. The primary outcomes of image quality as assessed by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were reported as random effects mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 6 studies reporting on 353 patients. There was no difference in cardiac SNR (mean difference, -1.42; 95% CI, -5.71 to 2.88; p = 0.52), cardiac CNR (mean difference, -3.83; 95% CI, -9.98 to 2.32; p = 0.22), aortic SNR (mean difference, -0.23; 95% CI, -7.83 to 7.37; p = 0.95), aortic CNR (mean difference, -3.95; 95% CI, -12.03 to 4.13; p = 0.34), and ileofemoral SNR (mean difference, -6.09; 95% CI, -13.80 to 1.62; p = 0.12) between the low dose and conventional protocols. There was a difference in ileofemoral CNR between the low dose and conventional protocols with a mean difference of -9.26 (95% CI, -15.06 to -3.46; p = 0.002). Overall, subjective image quality was similar between the 2 protocols.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review suggests that low contrast and low kV CTA for TAVR planning provides similar image quality to conventional CTA.</p>","PeriodicalId":15229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging","volume":"31 2","pages":"108-115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/fe/ec/jcvi-31-108.PMC10133812.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4250/jcvi.2022.0108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Minimizing contrast dose and radiation exposure while maintaining image quality during computed tomography angiography (CTA) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is desirable, but not well established. This systematic review compares image quality for low contrast and low kV CTA versus conventional CTA in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning.

Methods: We performed a systematic literature review to identify clinical studies comparing imaging strategies for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning. The primary outcomes of image quality as assessed by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were reported as random effects mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: We included 6 studies reporting on 353 patients. There was no difference in cardiac SNR (mean difference, -1.42; 95% CI, -5.71 to 2.88; p = 0.52), cardiac CNR (mean difference, -3.83; 95% CI, -9.98 to 2.32; p = 0.22), aortic SNR (mean difference, -0.23; 95% CI, -7.83 to 7.37; p = 0.95), aortic CNR (mean difference, -3.95; 95% CI, -12.03 to 4.13; p = 0.34), and ileofemoral SNR (mean difference, -6.09; 95% CI, -13.80 to 1.62; p = 0.12) between the low dose and conventional protocols. There was a difference in ileofemoral CNR between the low dose and conventional protocols with a mean difference of -9.26 (95% CI, -15.06 to -3.46; p = 0.002). Overall, subjective image quality was similar between the 2 protocols.

Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that low contrast and low kV CTA for TAVR planning provides similar image quality to conventional CTA.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
经导管主动脉瓣置换术前低对比度和低千伏CTA:一项系统综述。
背景:在进行经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)时,在保持图像质量的同时最小化造影剂和辐射暴露是可取的,但尚未得到很好的证实。本系统综述比较了低对比度和低kV CTA与常规CTA在主动脉瓣狭窄患者接受TAVR计划时的图像质量。方法:我们进行了系统的文献综述,以确定比较主动脉瓣狭窄患者接受TAVR计划的影像学策略的临床研究。通过信噪比(SNR)和对比噪声比(CNR)评估的图像质量的主要结果报告为随机效应平均差异,95%置信区间(CI)。结果:我们纳入了6项研究,报告了353例患者。两组心脏信噪比无显著差异(平均差异-1.42;95% CI, -5.71 ~ 2.88;p = 0.52),心脏CNR(平均差值-3.83;95% CI, -9.98 ~ 2.32;p = 0.22),主动脉信噪比(平均差异-0.23;95% CI, -7.83 ~ 7.37;p = 0.95),主动脉CNR(平均差值-3.95;95% CI, -12.03 ~ 4.13;p = 0.34),回肠股信噪比(平均差异为-6.09;95% CI, -13.80 ~ 1.62;P = 0.12)。低剂量组与常规组的回股CNR的平均差值为-9.26 (95% CI, -15.06 ~ -3.46;P = 0.002)。总体而言,两种方案的主观图像质量相似。结论:本系统综述表明,低对比度和低kV CTA用于TAVR规划可提供与传统CTA相似的图像质量。
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
Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
Deep learning models for segmentation and quantification of left atrial appendage volume using noncontrast cardiac computed tomography. Predicting outcomes in patients with pulmonary hypertension using right ventricular global longitudinal strain versus tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) and fractional area change: a retrospective analysis. Evaluation of sudden cardiac death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Current and emerging medical and surgical therapy in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
×
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:604180095
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