Skip to content

Effect of Snapshot Freeze on Cardiac CT Image Quality

Impact of a Motion Correction Algorithm on Image Quality and Diagnostic Utility in Patients Undergoing CT Angiography: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02618473
Enrollment
140
Registered
2015-12-01
Start date
2013-01-31
Completion date
2015-08-31
Last updated
2015-12-04

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Heart Diseases

Keywords

Coronary computed tomography angiography, motion artifacts, motion correction algorithm, diagnostic utility

Brief summary

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a new motion correction algorithm on image quality and diagnostic utility in unselected patients undergoing coronary cardiac computed tomography, and to investigate if this motion correction algorithm can compensate for the usual use of intravenously medication (beta-blockers) before the scan.

Detailed description

Aims: To investigate the motion correction algorithm Snapshot-Freeze(SSF) compared to standard reconstruction(STD) in patients randomized to receive beta-blockers(BB) or no beta-blockers(non-BB) before coronary CT angiography (CCTA), and to investigate if SSF can replace BB. Methods: The study included 140 consecutively recruited patients scheduled to CCTA to rule out coronary artery disease. The inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 18 years, Glomerular filtration rate ≥ 60 mL/min, Heart Rate between 60 and 85 bpm before the scan. The exclusion criteria were: irregular heart rhythm or history of allergic reaction to contrast agents. Patients were randomized to the BB group or the non-BB group. The trial complied with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the local ethics committee. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Image quality score: The evaluation was performed according to the Likert score as follows: 1: excellent, no motion artifacts, clear delineation of the segments; 2: good, minor artifacts, mild blurring of the segment; 3: adequate, moderate artifacts, moderate blurring without structure discontinuity; and 4: poor and non-diagnostic, with doubling or discontinuity in the course of the segments, preventing evaluation or producing vessel structures that were not differentiable. In cases where the image quality was less than excellent (Likert score 2-4), the readers noted the reason(s) for the observed artifact. Statistical analyses: Quantitative variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation, and categorical values as frequencies or percentages. Values from the Likert score were dichotomized to excellent vs. non-excellent (Likert score 1 vs. 2-4), and diagnostic vs. non-diagnostic (Likert score 1-3 vs. 4). McNemar's test was performed to test categorical variables separately per-vessel and per-patient level. Analyses for all segments were calculated by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Interventions

OTHERnon-seloken

regarding the guidelines patients receive seloken before the cardiac CT scan to lower the heart rate during the scan. The intervention in this study is to avoid the medication with seloken before the scan, and to investigate if the use of a new motion correction scan algorithm can compensate for the absence of the seloken.

Sponsors

Odense University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* age ≥ 18 years, * glomerular filtration rate ≥ 60 mL/min, * heart rate between 60 and 85 bpm before the scan

Exclusion criteria

* irregular heart rhythm * history of allergic reaction to contrast agents

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
images with non diagnostic image qualityup to 1 yearnumber of non diagnostic images.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
images with Excellent image qualityup to 1 yearnumber of presented images with Excellent image quality
motion artifactsup to 1 yearnumber of presented motion artifacts

Countries

Denmark

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026