European Radiology

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 995–1007 | Cite as

Study on motion artifacts in coronary arteries with an anthropomorphic moving heart phantom on an ECG-gated multidetector computed tomography unit

  • Marcel J. W. GreuterEmail author
  • Joost Dorgelo
  • Wim G. J. Tukker
  • Matthijs Oudkerk


Acquisition time plays a key role in the quality of cardiac multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and is directly related to the rotation time of the scanner. The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of heart rate and a multisector reconstruction algorithm on the image quality of coronary arteries of an anthropomorphic adjustable moving heart phantom on an ECG-gated MDCT unit. The heart phantom and a coronary artery phantom were used on a MDCT unit with a rotation time of 500 ms. The movement of the heart was determined by analysis of the images taken at different phases. The results indicate that the movement of the coronary arteries on the heart phantom is comparable to that in a clinical setting. The influence of the heart rate on image quality and artifacts was determined by analysis of several heart rates between 40 and 80 bpm where the movement of the heart was synchronized using a retrospective ECG-gated acquisition protocol. The resulting reformatted volume rendering images of the moving heart and the coronary arteries were qualitatively compared as a result of the heart rate. The evaluation was performed on three independent series by two independent radiologists for the image quality of the coronary arteries and the presence of artifacts. The evaluation shows that at heart rates above 50 bpm the influence of motion artifacts in the coronary arteries becomes apparent. In addition the influence of a dedicated multisector reconstruction technique on image quality was determined. The results show that the image quality of the coronary arteries is not only related to the heart rate and that the influence of the multisector reconstruction technique becomes significant above 70 bpm. Therefore, this study proves that from the actual acquisition time per heart cycle one cannot determine an actual acquisition time, but only a mathematical acquisition time.


Computed tomography technology Computed tomography image quality Coronary vessels 



The authors wish to thank Bert Koopman for making the technical adaptations to the heart model.


  1. 1.
    Giesler T, Baum U, Ropers D et al (2002) Noninvasive visualization of coronary arteries using contrast-enhanced multidetector CT. Am J Roentgenol 179:911–916Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hong C, Becker CR, Huber A et al (2001) ECG-gated reconstructed multi-detector row CT coronary angiography: effect of varying trigger delay on image quality. Radiology 220:712–717PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kopp AF, Schroeder S, Kuettner A et al (2001) Coronary arteries: retrospectively ECG-gated multi-detector row CT angiography with selective optimization of the image reconstruction window. Radiology 221:683–688PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rumberger J, Kaufman L (2003) A Rosetta stone for coronary calcium risk stratification. Am J Roentgenol 181:743–748Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown SJ, Hayball MP, Coulden RAR (2000) Impact of motion artefact on the measurement of coronary calcium score. Br J Radiol 73:956–962Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ulzheimer S, Kalender WA (2003) Assessment of calcium scoring performance in cardiac computed tomography. Eur Radiol 13:484–497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hopper KD, Strollo DC, Mauger DT (2002) Comparison of electron-beam and ungated helical CT in detecting coronary arterial calcification by using a working heart phantom and artificial coronary arteries. Radiology 222:474–482Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Daly TR, Zink FE (2000) Motion artifacts in subsecond conventional CT and electron-beam CT: pictorial demonstration of temporal resolution. Radiographics 20:1675–1681Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wicky S, Rosol M, Hamberg LM et al (2002) Evaluation of retrospective multisector and half scan ECG-gated multidetector cardiac CT protocols with moving phantoms. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26(5):768–776Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wicky S, Rosol M, Hoffmann U, Graziano M, Yucel KE, Brady TJ (2003) Comparative study with a moving heart phantom of the impact of temporal resolution on image quality with two multidetector electrocardiography-gated computed tomography units. J Comput Assist Tomogr 27(3):392–398Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parker DL (1982) Optimal short scan convolution reconstruction for fanbeam CT. Med Phys 9(2):254–257Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Flohr T, Ohnesorge B (2001) Heart rate adaptive optimization of spatial and temporal resolution for electrocardiogram-gated multislice spiral CT of the heart. J Comput Assist Tomogr 25(6):907–923CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Halliburton SS, Stillman AE, Flohr T et al (2003) Do segmented reconstruction algorithms for cardiac multi-slice computed tomography improve image quality? Herz 28:20–31Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruder H, Schaller S, Ohnesorge B, Mertelmeier T (1999) High temporal resolution volume heart imaging with multirow computed tomography. SPIE Med Imaging 3661:420–432Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flohr T, Bruder H, Stierstorfer K, Simon J, Schaller B, Ohnesorge B (2002) New technical developments in multislice CT. Part 2. Sub-millimeter 16-slice scanning and increased gantry rotation speed for cadiac imaging. RoFo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 174(8):1022–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mao S, Lu B, Takasu J, Oudiz RJ, Budoff MJ (2003) Measurement of the RT interval on ECG records during electron-beam CT. Acad Radiol 10:638–643Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herzog C, Abolmaali N, Balzer JO et al (2002) Heart-rate-adapted image reconstruction in multidetector-row cardiac CT: influence of physiological and technical prerequisite on image quality. Eur Radiol 12(11):2670–2678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mao S, Budoff MJ, Bin L, Liu SCK (2001) Optimal ECG trigger point in electron-beam CT studies. Acad Radiol 8:1107–1115Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Becker C et al (2000) Cardiac imaging by means of electrocardiographically gated multisection spiral CT: initial experience. Radiology 217:564–571PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Achenbach S, Ropers D, Holle J, Muschiol G, Daniel WG, Moshage W (2000) In-plane coronary arterial motion velocity: measurement with electron-beam CT. Radiology 216:457–463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lu B, Mao SS, Zhuang N et al (2001) Coronary artery motion during the cardiac cycle and optimal ECG triggering for coronary artery imaging. Invest Radiol 36(5):250–256Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hofman MBM, Wickline SA, Lorenz CH (1998) Quantification of in-plane motion of the coronary arteries during the cardiac cycle: implications for acquisition window duration for MR flow quantification. J Magn Reson Imaging 8:568–576Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dodge JT, Brown BG, Bolson EL, Dodge HT (1992) Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation. Circulation 86:232–246Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schroeder S, Kopp AF, Kuettner A et al (2002) Influence of heart rate on vessel visibility in noninvasive coronary angiography using new multislice computed tomography; experience in 94 patients. Clin Imaging 26:106–111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jakobs TF, Wintersperger BJ, Herzog P, Flohr T, Suess C, Knez A, Reiser MF, Becker CR (2003) Ultra-low-dose coronary artery calcium screening using multislice CT with retrospective ECG gating. Eur Radiol 13:1923–1930Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PMT, de Feyter PJ (2002) Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 106:2051–2054Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Herzog C, Britten M, Balzer JO, Mack MG, Zangos S, Ackermann H, Schaechinger V, Schaller S, Flohr T, Vogl TJ (2004) Multidetector-row cardiac CT: diagnostic value of calcium scoring and CT coronary angiography in patients with symptomatic, but atypical, chest pain. Eur Radiol 14:169–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcel J. W. Greuter
    • 1
    Email author
  • Joost Dorgelo
    • 1
  • Wim G. J. Tukker
    • 1
  • Matthijs Oudkerk
    • 1
  1. 1.Radiology DepartmentGroningen University Hospital RB GroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations