European Radiology

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 97–102 | Cite as

Does 16-MDCT angiography scanning direction affect image quality of coronary artery bypass grafts and the native coronary arteries?

  • Tuncay Hazirolan
  • Baris TurkbeyEmail author
  • Musturay Karcaaltincaba
  • Deniz Akata
  • Levent Sahiner
  • Kudret Aytemir
  • M. Ali Oto
  • Ferhun Balkanci
  • Aytekin Besim


To assess the impact of scanning direction on the image quality of coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs), native coronary arteries (NCAs) were examined by electrocardiographically (ECG) gated 16-row multidetector computed tomography (16-MDCT). Eighty-two patients with 209 grafts were studied by 16-MDCT. Forty-one patients with 111 grafts were scanned craniocaudally. Forty-one patients with 98 grafts were scanned caudocranially. CABG, native coronary arteries were examined in four (proximal, middle, distal, distal anastomoses), three (proximal, middle, distal) segments, respectively. Subjective image quality on a four-point scale was calculated for segments. Scores of groups were compared. Results Image quality scores of proximal, distal segments of the right coronary artery (RCA) were better in caudocranially scanned group (P<0.05). When we subgrouped patients according to initial heart rates (IHR) (group 1, <65 beats/min; group 2, ≥65 beats/min), there was no statistical significance between image quality scores of coronary arteries, CABG when IHR was <65 beats/min in groups regardless of scanning direction. Scores of anastomotic segment of CABG to RCA, middle segments of circumflex coronary artery, proximal and distal segments of RCA in caudocranially scanned group were better when the IHR is ≥65 beats/min compared with the craniocaudally scanned group. When the IHR of the patient is ≥65 beats/min, performing ECG-gated 16-MDCT angiography in the caudocranial direction provides better image quality for evaluation of coronary arteries and CABGs.


MDCT Coronary CT angiography Bypass grafts Scanning direction 


  1. 1.
    Yusuf S, Reddy S, Ounpuu S, Anand S (2001) Global burden of cardiovascular diseases: part I: general considerations, the epidemiologic transition, risk factors, and impact of urbanization. Circulation 104:2746–2753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Motwani JG, Topol EJ (1998) Aortocoronary saphenous vein graft disease: pathogenesis, predisposition, and prevention. Circulation 97:916–931PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cameron A, Davis KB, Green G, Schaff HV (1996) Coronary bypass surgery with internal thoracic artery grafts: effects on survival over a 15-year period. N Engl J Med 334:216–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Campeau L, Enjalbert M, Lesperance J, Vaislic C, Grondin CM, Bourassa MG (1983) Atherosclerosis and late closure of aortocoronary saphenous vein grafts: sequential angiographic studies at 2 weeks, 1 year, 5 to 7 years, and 10 to 12 years after surgery. Circulation 68:II1–II7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grondin CM, Campeau L, Thornton JC, Engle JC, Cross FS, Schreiber H (1989) Coronary artery bypass grafting with saphenous vein. Circulation 79:I24–I29PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM (1989) New arteries for old. Circulation 79: I40–I45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson LW, Krone R (1993) Cardiac catheterization 1991: a report of the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCA&I). Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 28:219–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorgelo J, Willems TP, van Ooijen PM, Panday GF, Boonstra PW, Zijlstra F, Oudkerk M (2005) A 16-slice multidetector computed tomography protocol for evaluation of the gastroepiploic artery grafts in patients after coronary artery bypass surgery. Eur Radiol 15:1994–1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ha JW, Cho SY, Shim WH, Chung N, Yang Y, Lee HM (1999) Noninvasive evaluation of coronary artery bypass graft patency using three dimensional angiography obtained with contrast enhanced electron beam CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:1055–1059PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim WY, Danias PG, Stuber M et al (2001) Coronary magnetic resonance angiography for the detection of coronary stenoses. N Engl J Med 345:1863–1869PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, De Feyter PJ (2002) Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 106:2051–2054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, Kuhl H, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J (2004) Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 44:1224–1229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dewey M, Lembcke A, Enzweiler C, Hamm B, Rogalla P (2004) Isotropic half-millimeter angiography of coronary artery bypass grafts with 16-slice computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 77:800–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Treede H, Becker C, Reichenspurner H et al (2002) Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in coronary surgery: first experiences with a new tool for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Ann Thorac Surg 74:1398–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan MF, Herzog C, Landenberger K, Martens S, Maataoui A, Ackermann H, Dietrich M, Moritz A, Vogl TJ (2005) MDCT of the proximal anastomoses created by nitinol implants in coronary artery bypass grafting: a retrospective two-observer evaluation. Eur Radiol 15:305–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hamoir XL, Flohr T, Hamoir V, Labaki L, Tricquet JY, Duhamel A, Kirsch J (2005) Coronary arteries: assessment of image quality and optimal reconstruction window in retrospective ECG-gated multislice CT at 375-ms gantry rotation time. Eur Radiol 15:296–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Begemann PG, van Stevendaal U, Manzke R, Stork A, Weiss F, Nolte-Ernsting C, Grass M, Adam G. (2005) Evaluation of spatial and temporal resolution for ECG-gated 16-row multidetector CT using a dynamic cardiac phantom. Eur Radiol 15:1015–1026PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choi HS, Choi BW, Choe KO et al (2004). Pitfalls, artifacts, and remedies in multi-detector row CT coronary angiography. Radiographics 24:787–800PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khan MF, Herzog C, Landenberger K, Martens S, Maataoui A, Ackermann H, Dietrich M, Moritz A, Vogl TJ (2005) MDCT of the proximal anastomoses created by nitinol implants in coronary artery bypass grafting: a retrospective two-observer evaluation. Eur Radiol 15:305–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ et al (2002) Non-invasive coronary angiography with multislice spiral computed tomography: impact of heart rate. Heart 88:470–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    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 220:712–717PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    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 221:683–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Willmann JK, Weishaupt D, Kobza R et al (2004) Coronary artery bypass grafts: ECG-gated multi-detector row CT angiography–influence of image reconstruction interval on graft visibility. Radiology 232:568–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giesler T, Baum U, Ropers D, et al (2002) Noninvasive visualization of coronary arteries using contrast-enhanced multidetector CT: influence of heart rate on image quality and stenosis detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:911–916PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    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
  26. 26.
    Hofman MB, 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 8:568–576PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang Y, Vidan E, Bergman GW (1999) Cardiac motion of coronary arteries: variability in the rest period and implications for coronary MR angiography. Radiology 213:751–758PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pannu HK, Flohr TG, Corl FM, Fishman EK (2003) Current concepts in multi-detector row CT evaluation of the coronary arteries: principles, techniques, and anatomy. Radiographics 23:111–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tuncay Hazirolan
    • 1
  • Baris Turkbey
    • 1
    Email author
  • Musturay Karcaaltincaba
    • 1
  • Deniz Akata
    • 1
  • Levent Sahiner
    • 2
  • Kudret Aytemir
    • 2
  • M. Ali Oto
    • 2
  • Ferhun Balkanci
    • 1
  • Aytekin Besim
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyHacettepe University School of MedicineAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of CardiologyHacettepe University School of MedicineAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations