Comparison of radiation dose and its correlates between coronary computed tomography angiography and invasive coronary angiography in Northeastern Thailand

8Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The number of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) exams is steadily growing. A novel computed tomography (CT) system has been developed to increase image quality while lowering patient radiation. The radiation dose attributed to CCTA has received considerable attention, whereas the dose associated with invasive catheter angiography (ICA) has received less. This study aims to investigate the radiation exposure of CCTA in patients and compare it to ICA. Results: The mean effective dose of CCTA was 2.88 ± 0.85 mSv which was significantly lower than the mean effective dose of ICA (5.61 ± 0.55 mSv), p < 0.0001. The effective dose of CCTA correlated with the weight, height, and BMI, while the effective dose of ICA was associated with patient weight and BMI. The radiation exposure from CCTA has been considerably reduced over the last ten years by almost 2.5 folds. The mean radiation dose from the newer generation CT used in 2019 was significantly lower than that of the single-source CT in 2010 (2.88 ± 0.85 mSv vs. 7.15 ± 3.4 mSv, p < 0.001). Conclusions: CCTA allows evaluation of CAD with a significantly less effective radiation dose to patients than diagnostic ICA. There was a significant decrease in radiation dose from CCTA over time. Regular measurement of patient doses is an essential step to optimize exposure. It makes operators aware of their performance and allows comparisons with generally accepted practices.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aupongkaroon, P., Makarawate, P., & Chaosuwannakit, N. (2022). Comparison of radiation dose and its correlates between coronary computed tomography angiography and invasive coronary angiography in Northeastern Thailand. Egyptian Heart Journal, 74(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43044-022-00241-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free