The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prospectively Gated Transverse Coronary CT Angiography versus Retrospectively Gated Helical Technique: Improved Image Quality and Reduced Radiation Dose
Abstract
PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare image quality, radiation dose, and blood vessel assessability for coronary artery computed tomographic (CT) angiograms obtained with a prospectively gated transverse (PGT) CT technique and a retrospectively gated helical (RGH) CT technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study received a waiver for approval from the institutional review board, including one for informed consent. Coronary CT angiograms obtained with 64-detector row CT were retrospectively evaluated in 203 clinical patients. A routine RGH technique was evaluated in 82 consecutive patients (44 males, 38 females; mean age, 55.6 years). The PGT technique was then evaluated in 121 additional patients (71 males, 50 females; mean age, 56.7 years). All images were evaluated for image quality, estimated radiation dose, and coronary artery segment assessability. Differences in image quality score were evaluated by using a proportional odds logistic regression model, with main effects for three readers, two techniques, and four arteries. RESULTS: The mean effective dose for the group with the PGT technique was 2.8 mSv; this represents an 83% reduction as compared with that for the group with the RGH technique (mean, 18.4 mSv; P < .001). The image quality score for each of the arteries, as well as the overall combined score, was significantly greater for images obtained with PGT technique than for images obtained with RGH technique. The combined mean image quality score was 4.791 for images obtained with PGT technique versus 4.514 for images obtained with RGH technique (proportional odds model odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval: 1.7, 4.8). The percentage of assessable coronary artery segments was 98.6% (1196 of 1213) for images obtained with PGT technique versus 97.9% (1741 of 1778) for images obtained with RGH technique (P = .83). CONCLUSION: PGT coronary CT angiography offers improved image quality and substantially reduced effective radiation dose compared with traditional RGH coronary CT angiography.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2005) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/0-387-27255-0_9 · Cited by 20,133
Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models
LIANG, K.-Y., & ZEGER, S. L. (1986) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/73.1.13 · Cited by 18,550
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Hapeman, D. E. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484817 · Cited by 9,373
Agresti, A. (2002) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471249688 · Cited by 6,746
Austen, W., Edwards, J., Frye, R., Gensini, G., Gott, V., Griffith, L., McGoon, D., Murphy, M., & Roe, B. (1975) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.51.4.5 · Cited by 3,256
International Electrotechnical Commission
Buck, J. (2010) · Handbook of Transnational Economic Governance Regimes · doi:10.1163/ej.9789004163300.i-1081.494 · Cited by 2,742
Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation:: BEIR VII Phase 2
Earth, D. O. (2006) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 2,190
Diagnostic Accuracy of Noninvasive Coronary Angiography Using 64-Slice Spiral Computed Tomography
Raff, G. L., Gallagher, M. J., O’Neill, W. W., & Goldstein, J. A. (2005) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.056 · Cited by 1,472
Einstein, A. J., Henzlova, M. J., & Rajagopalan, S. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.298.3.317 · Cited by 1,410
Cited by
Atherosclerotic Plaque Composition: Analysis with Multicolor CT and Targeted Gold Nanoparticles
Cormode, D. P., Roessl, E., Thran, A., Skajaa, T., Gordon, R. E., Schlomka, J.-P., Fuster, V., Fisher, E. A., Mulder, W. J. M., Proksa, R., et al. (2010) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.10092473 · Cited by 479
Nanoparticle contrast agents for computed tomography: a focus on micelles
Cormode, D. P., Naha, P. C., & Fayad, Z. A. (2014) · Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1002/cmmi.1551 · Cited by 362
Moscariello, A., Takx, R. A. P., Schoepf, U. J., Renker, M., Zwerner, P. L., O’Brien, T. X., Allmendinger, T., Vogt, S., Schmidt, B., Savino, G., et al. (2011) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-011-2164-9 · Cited by 276
Yamasaki, Y., Nagao, M., Yamamura, K., Yonezawa, M., Matsuo, Y., Kawanami, S., Kamitani, T., Higuchi, K., Sakamoto, I., Shiokawa, Y., et al. (2014) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-014-3344-1 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Earls, J. P., Berman, E. L., Urban, B. A., Curry, C. A., Lane, J. L., Jennings, R. S., McCulloch, C. C., Hsieh, J., & Londt, J. H.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 246
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 742-753
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2125972369
- Cited by
- 543
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 69.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prospectively Gated Transverse Coronary CT Angiography versus Retrospectively Gated Helical Technique: Improved Image Quality and Reduced Radiation Dose. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2463070989
- The paper
- Earls, J. P., Berman, E. L., Urban, B. A., Curry, C. A., Lane, J. L., Jennings, R. S., McCulloch, C. C., Hsieh, J., & Londt, J. H. (2008). Prospectively Gated Transverse Coronary CT Angiography versus Retrospectively Gated Helical Technique: Improved Image Quality and Reduced Radiation Dose. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2463070989
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
