Table 4.
Result of qualitative image quality assessment for coronary arteries.
| Coronary Arteries | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author (year) | % iodine reduction | VMIs (keV) | CNR (SECT vs. DECT) |
SNR (SECT vs. DECT) |
Subjective image quality assessment (SECT vs. DECT) |
| Raju et al. (2014) [27] | 56 | 60 | 16.9 (4.8) vs. 16.8 (5.2) | 13.8 (3.9) vs. 12.0 (3.9) | 5-point scale, good or excellent vs. moderate or good overall image quality † |
| Carrascosa et al. (2015) | 50 | 60 | 18.0 (11.5) vs. 15.5 (9.6) ‡ | 14.5 (8.9) vs. 11.6 (7.1) † | 5-point scale, good or excellent overall image quality |
| Oda et al. (2019) [28] | 50 | 50 | Asc. aorta 20.5 (5.0) vs. 29.3 (8.5) † LMA, 19.8 (4.8) vs. 27.2 (7.7) †; Proximal RCA, 19.6 (4.4) vs. 26.9 (6.6) †; Distal LAD 8.3 (4.6) vs. 23.9 (6.7) †; Distal LCX 18.4 (4.8) vs. 26.0 (9.9) †; Distal RCA 19.1 (4.1) vs. 25.8 (6.1) † |
N/A | 4-point scale, good or excellent overall image quality; not interfering or minimal or absent noise |
| Rotzinger et al. (2021) [29] | 40 | 55 | Lumen-fat 19.3 (11.6) vs. 24.9 (19.7) †; lumen-muscle 12.2 (8.5) vs. 14.3 (12.4) †; lumen-bone 6.8 (7.3) vs. 6.7 (8.9) | N/A | 4-point scale, good or excellent overall image quality (average image quality score |
† p > 0.01; ‡ p < 0.05. VMIs, virtual monoenergetic images; CNR, contrast to noise ratio; SNR, signal to noise ratio; DECT, dual energy CT; SECT, single energy CT; LMA, left main coronary artery; RCA, right coronary artery; LAD, left anterior descending artery; LCX, left circumflex artery; N/A, not available.