PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1792038
Review Article

Contrast Kinetics in CT Coronary Angiography

Manphool Singhal  ‡   *
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
,
Pavithra Subramanian  ‡   *
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
,
Arun Sharma 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) is a technically demanding radiological investigation that requires adequate opacification of coronary arteries at peak aortic enhancement phase, with minimal or no contrast in the superior vena cava and right-sided cardiac chambers to avoid streak artifacts of dense contrast. Therefore, it is prudent to know about contrast media, contrast kinetics, and contrast injection protocols. This article attempts to describe the essentials of various aspects of contrast media that should be considered for CTCA along with an in-depth analysis of contrast kinetics that every radiologist should know for obtaining adequate opacification of coronary arteries.

Keywords

contrast kinetics - CT coronary angiography - time-density curve - peak aortic enhancement - minimum scan delay - test-bolus - bolus-tracking

Declaration

Authors declare this manuscript is solely submitted to IJRI and not submitted anywhere else.


* Both authors contributed equally and share FIRST authorship.




Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
19. November 2024

© 2024. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Frydrychowicz A, Pache G, Saueressig U. et al. Comparison of reconstruction intervals in routine ECG-pulsed 64-row-MSCT coronary angiography in frequency controlled patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2007; 30 (01) 79-84
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Johnson PT, Pannu HK, Fishman EK. IV contrast infusion for coronary artery CT angiography: literature review and results of a nationwide survey. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192 (05) W214-21
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Becker CR, Hong C, Knez A. et al. Optimal contrast application for cardiac 4-detector-row computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2003; 38 (11) 690-694
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Johnson TRC, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ. et al. Optimization of contrast material administration for electrocardiogram-gated computed tomographic angiography of the chest. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007; 31 (02) 265-271
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Pasternak JJ, Williamson EE. Clinical pharmacology, uses, and adverse reactions of iodinated contrast agents: a primer for the non-radiologist. Mayo Clin Proc 2012; 87 (04) 390-402
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Caschera L, Lazzara A, Piergallini L, Ricci D, Tuscano B, Vanzulli A. Contrast agents in diagnostic imaging: present and future. Pharmacol Res 2016; 110: 65-75
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Abbara S, Blanke P, Maroules CD. et al. SCCT guidelines for the performance and acquisition of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee: endorsed by the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2016; 10 (06) 435-449
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Xiao Y, Zeng G, Liu X, Peng C, Lai C, Zhou P. Safety enhancement in adult body computed tomography scanning: comparison of iodixanol versus iohexol. Springerplus 2016; 5 (01) 148
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Sundgren PC, Bååth L, Törnquist C, Hougens Grynne B, Kjaersgaard P, Almén T. Image quality and safety after iodixanol in intravenous urography; a comparison with iohexol. Br J Radiol 1996; 69 (824) 699-703
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Hubbard L, Malkasian S, Zhao Y, Abbona P, Molloi S. Contrast media timing optimization for coronary CT angiography: a retrospective validation study in swine. Eur Radiol 2023; 33 (03) 1620-1628
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Faggioni L, Gabelloni M. Iodine concentration and optimization in computed tomography angiography: current issues. Invest Radiol 2016; 51 (12) 816-822
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Oda S, Utsunomiya D, Nakaura T. et al. Basic concepts of contrast injection protocols for coronary computed tomography angiography. Curr Cardiol Rev 2019; 15 (01) 24-29
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, Sagel SS, Crowe TM, Gaines MV. Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 1995; 195 (02) 353-357
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Ho LM, Nelson RC, Delong DM. Determining contrast medium dose and rate on basis of lean body weight: does this strategy improve patient-to-patient uniformity of hepatic enhancement during multi-detector row CT?. Radiology 2007; 243 (02) 431-437
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S. et al. Abdominal multidetector CT in patients with varying body fat percentages: estimation of optimal contrast material dose. Radiology 2008; 249 (03) 872-877
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Bae KT, Seeck BA, Hildebolt CF. et al. Contrast enhancement in cardiovascular MDCT: effect of body weight, height, body surface area, body mass index, and obesity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190 (03) 777-784
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Yanaga Y, Awai K, Nakaura T. et al. Effect of contrast injection protocols with dose adjusted to the estimated lean patient body weight on aortic enhancement at CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192 (04) 1071-1078
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Mosteller RD. Simplified calculation of body-surface area. N Engl J Med 1987; 317 (17) 1098
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Bae KT, Heiken JP, Brink JA. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part II. Effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Radiology 1998; 207 (03) 657-662
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Husmann L, Alkadhi H, Boehm T. et al. Influence of cardiac hemodynamic parameters on coronary artery opacification with 64-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2006; 16 (05) 1111-1116
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Bae KT. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology 2010; 256 (01) 32-61
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Weininger M, Barraza JM, Kemper CA, Kalafut JF, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Cardiothoracic CT angiography: current contrast medium delivery strategies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196 (03) W260-72
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Fleischmann D, Kamaya A. Optimal vascular and parenchymal contrast enhancement: the current state of the art. Radiol Clin North Am 2009; 47 (01) 13-26
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Birnbaum BA, Jacobs JE, Langlotz CP, Ramchandani P. Assessment of a bolus-tracking technique in helical renal CT to optimize nephrographic phase imaging. Radiology 1999; 211 (01) 87-94
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G. Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology 2000; 217 (02) 430-435
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Marchal G, Vogl TJ, Heiken JP, Rubin GD. Multidetector-row computed tomography: scanning and contrast protocols. Springer; Milan, Italy: 2005: 1-33
    CrossrefSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Vrtiska TJ. et al. Image quality and dose comparison among screen-film, computed, and CT scanned projection radiography: applications to CT urography. Radiology 2001; 221 (02) 395-403
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Awai K, Hiraishi K, Hori S. Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Radiology 2004; 230 (01) 142-150
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Bae KT. Peak contrast enhancement in CT and MR angiography: when does it occur and why? Pharmacokinetic study in a porcine model. Radiology 2003; 227 (03) 809-816
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Auler MA, Heagy T, Aganovic L, Brothers R, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Saline chasing technique with dual-syringe injector systems for multi-detector row computed tomographic angiography: rationale, indications, and protocols. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2006; 35 (01) 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Cademartiri F, Mollet N, van der Lugt A. et al. Non-invasive 16-row multislice CT coronary angiography: usefulness of saline chaser. Eur Radiol 2004; 14 (02) 178-183
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Yamaguchi I, Kidoya E, Suzuki M, Kimura H. Evaluation of required saline volume in dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography using saline flush technique. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2009; 33 (01) 23-28
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar