自由呼吸状态下冠状动脉CT造影可行性研究

Feasibility of Free-Breathing Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography:Initial Experience

目的探讨自由呼吸、不屏气状态下,利用256-MDCT行冠状动脉造影的可行性。方法 80例受检者随机分为两组:A组40例,扫描时须受检者屏气配合;B组40例,检查全过程无屏气口令,受检者自由呼吸。比较两组图像噪声水平、信噪比、主观评分(3分制:3分最佳,2分尚可,1分不能满足诊断)、辐射剂量。比较两组增强扫描前后心率变化程度。结果两组间噪声水平、信噪比、辐射剂量均无统计学差异。增强扫描前与增强扫描中心率差异:A组(6.80±7.59)bpm,B组(3.03±2.58)bpm(P=0.012)。图像质量主观评分:A组(2.55±0.64)分,B组(2.85±0.36)分(P=0.018)。两种扫描模式相比,自由呼吸状态心率变化较小,检查效果更佳。结论针对本研究中使用的设备及扫描方案,自由呼吸状态下行CCTA检查,效果优于屏气状态下检查。

Objective To evaluate the feasibility of coronary computed tomography angiography（CCTA） duringfreebreathing using a 256-row MDCT.Methods In 80 patients who underwent CCTA,40 were performed during free-breathing,and theremaining 40 during breath-holding.The quality scores for coronary arteries were analyzed and definedas： 3（excellent）,2（good）,and 1（poor）.The image noise（SD）,signal-to-noiseratio（SNR） and effectiveradiation dose（ED）were compared between thetwo groups.We compared the differences in theheart rates during the planning and scanning period between two methods.Results The SD,SNRand ED were not significantly different between the two groups.The mean difference between the heart rates before and during scanning for group A was（6.80 ± 7.59） bpm,and larger than（3.03 ± 2.58） bpm for group B（P = 0.012）.Quality scores offree-breathingwere better than breath-holding（group A：2.55 ± 0.64,group B： 2.85 ± 0.36,P = 0.018）.Conclusion Free-breathing CCTA was better than breath-holding CCTA using equipment and protocol in this study.