Abstract
Dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) is a new imaging technique involving three-dimensional rotation of the gantry around the patient with simultaneous left to right and craniocaudal movements. This allows complete imaging of the left or right coronary tree with a single acquisition run. Previous small studies have indicated that DARCA is associated with reduced radiation dose and contrast use in comparison with standard coronary angiography (SCA). We conducted a registry of unselected patients undergoing DARCA or SCA. DARCA was used in 107 patients and SCA in 105 patients. Mean number of acquisition runs was 2.6 for DARCA and 6.9 for SCA (P < 0.0001). Mean radiation dose (dose–area product, DAP) was 30.4 Gy cm2 for SCA and 15.9 Gy cm2 for DARCA (P < 0.0001). Mean contrast volume was 41.7 ml for SCA and 25.7 ml for DARCA (P < 0.0001). Case time for DARCA in the first half of the study was 20.8 ± 1.4 min compared with 15.2 ± 2.0 min in the second half of the study (P = 0.0015), suggesting a learning curve. In the DARCA group, 64 % of patients required only two acquisition runs for complete and satisfactory imaging. There were no adverse effects resulting from DARCA. Two cases are presented to illustrate the diagnostic ability of DARCA. DARCA was associated with a 48 % reduction in radiation dose and 36 % reduction in contrast volume in comparison with SCA, with comparable diagnostic ability.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Mehran R, Aymong ED, Nikolsky E, Lasic Z, Iakovou I, Fahy M, Mintz GS, Lansky AJ, Moses JW, Stone GW, Leon MB, Dangas G (2004) A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: development and initial validation. J Am Coll Cardiol 44:1393–1399
Klein AJ, Garcia JA, Hudson PA, Kim MS, Messenger JC, Casserly IP, Wink O, Hattler B, Tsai TT, Chen SY, Hansgen A, Carroll JD (2011) Safety and efficacy of dual-axis rotational coronary angiography vs. standard coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 77:820–827
Garcia JA, Agostoni P, Green NE, Maddux JT, Chen SY, Messenger JC, Casserly IP, Hansgen A, Wink O, Movassaghi B, Groves BM, Van Den Heuvel P, Verheye S, Van Langenhove G, Vermeersch P, Van den Branden F, Yeghiazarians Y, Michaels AD, Carroll JD (2009) Rotational vs. standard coronary angiography: an image content analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 73:753–761
Le Heron JC (1992) Estimation of effective dose to the patient during medical X-ray examinations from measurements of the dose-area product. Phys Med Biol 37:2117–2126
Bogaert E, Bacher K, Thierens H (2008) Interventional cardiovascular procedures in Belgium: effective dose and conversion factors. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 129:77–82
Empen K, Kuon E, Hummel A, Gebauer C, Dorr M, Konemann R, Hoffmann W, Staudt A, Weitmann K, Reffelmann T, Felix SB (2010) Comparison of rotational with conventional coronary angiography. Am Heart J 160:552–563
Wall B, Haylock R, Jansen JTM, Hillier MC, Hart D, Shrimpton PC (2011) Radiation risks from medical X-ray examinations as a function of the age and sex of the patient. Health Protection Agency, Chilton
Martin CJ (2007) Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures? Br J Radiol 80:639–647
Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M (2008) Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248:254–263
Grech M, Debono J, Xuereb RG, Fenech A, Grech V (2012) A comparison between dual axis rotational coronary angiography and conventional coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 80:576–580
Hirshfeld JW Jr (2011) Radiation exposure in cardiovascular medicine: how do we protect our patients and ourselves? Circ Cardiovasc Interv 4:216–218
Gomez-Menchero AE, Diaz JF, Sanchez-Gonzalez C, Cardenal R, Sanghvi AB, Roa-Garrido J, Rodriguez-Lopez JL (2012) Comparison of dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (XPERSWING) versus conventional technique in routine practice. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl) 65:434–439
Wrixon AD (2008) New ICRP recommendations. J Radiol Prot 28:161–168
International Commission on Radiological Protection (1997) Radiological protection and safety in medicine. Pergamon Press, Oxford
Hart D, Hillier MC, Wall BF (2007) Doses to patients from radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray imaging procedures in the UK—2005 review. Health Protection Agency
Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, Shah ND, Nasir K, Einstein AJ, Nallamothu BK (2009) Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med 361:849–857
Eisenberg MJ, Afilalo J, Lawler PR, Abrahamowicz M, Richard H, Pilote L (2011) Cancer risk related to low-dose ionizing radiation from cardiac imaging in patients after acute myocardial infarction. CMAJ 183:430–436
Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP (2004) Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 231:393–398
Maddux JT, Wink O, Messenger JC, Groves BM, Liao R, Strzelczyk J, Chen SY, Carroll JD (2004) Randomized study of the safety and clinical utility of rotational angiography versus standard angiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 62:167–174
Ogita M, Sakakura K, Nakamura T, Funayama H, Wada H, Naito R, Sugawara Y, Kubo N, Ako J, Momomura S (2012) Association between deteriorated renal function and long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart Vessels 27:460–467
Utsunomiya D, Fukunaga T, Oda S, Awai K, Nakaura T, Urata J, Yamashita Y (2011) Multidetector computed tomography evaluation of coronary plaque morphology in patients with stable angina. Heart Vessels 26:392–398
Harigaya H, Motoyama S, Sarai M, Inoue K, Hara T, Okumura M, Naruse H, Ishii J, Hishida H, Ozaki Y (2011) Prediction of the no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention using coronary computed tomography angiography. Heart Vessels 26:363–369
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the patients who enrolled in the study and all participating staff of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory at The Canberra Hospital.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Farshid, A., Chandrasekhar, J. & McLean, D. Benefits of dual-axis rotational coronary angiography in routine clinical practice. Heart Vessels 29, 199–205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-013-0349-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-013-0349-7