Automatic selection of optimal systolic and diastolic reconstruction windows for dual-source CT coronary angiography

• Published in: European radiology Vol. 19; no. 7; pp. 1645 - 1652
• Main Authors: Seifarth, H., Puesken, M., Wienbeck, S., Maintz, D., Fischbach, R., Heindel, W., Juergens, K.-U.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer-Verlag 01-07-2009; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Algorithms; Artificial Intelligence; Automation; Cardiac; Cardiovascular disease; Coronary Angiography - methods; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging; Coronary vessels; Datasets; Diagnostic Radiology; Female; Heart rate; Humans; Imaging; Internal Medicine; Interventional Radiology; Male; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Neuroradiology; Patients; Pattern Recognition, Automated - methods; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods; Radiology; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods; Ultrasound; Young Adult; Germany; Motion map; Cardiac CT; Reconstruction window; Dual-source CT
• ISSN: 0938-7994; 1432-1084
• DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1329-2

The aim of this study was to assess the performance of a motion-map algorithm that automatically determines optimal reconstruction windows for dual-source coronary CT angiography. In datasets from 50 consecutive patients, optimal systolic and diastolic reconstruction windows were determined using the motion-map algorithm. For manual determination of the optimal reconstruction window, datasets were reconstructed in 5% steps throughout the RR interval. Motion artifacts were rated for each major coronary vessel using a five-point scale. Mean motion scores using the motion-map algorithm were 2.4 ± 0.8 for systolic reconstructions and 1.9 ± 0.8 for diastolic reconstructions. Using the manual approach, overall motion scores were significantly better (1.9 ± 0.5 and 1.7 ± 0.6, p < 0.05), but diagnostic image quality was reached in >90% of cases using either approach. Using the automated approach, there was a negative correlation between heart rate and motion scores for systolic reconstructions (ρ = −0.26, p < 0.05) and a positive correlation for diastolic reconstructions (ρ = 0.46, p < 0.01). For the manual approach, no significant correlation was found for systolic reconstructions (ρ = −0.1, p = 0.52), while there was a positive correlation for diastolic reconstructions (ρ = 0.48, p < 0.01). Thus, the motion-map algorithm is a useful tool to save time in finding an appropriate reconstruction window in patients with heart rates <70 bpm (diastolic reconstruction) and >80 bpm (systolic reconstruction).