Impact of PVCs noted during coronary calcium scan on image quality and accuracy in subsequent coronary dual-source CT angiography

  • Wolfgang Eicher
  • Thomas Kau
  • Martin Niedermayer
  • Birgit Senft
  • Maria Sinzig
  • Birgit Strozyk
  • Klaus Armin Hausegger
Original Paper


The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the presence of one or more premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) during coronary calcium score scan (CS) on image quality and accuracy of subsequent dual-source coronary CT angiography (DS CCTA). Fifty-three out of 502 patients showed one or more PVCs during CS and built the study group. Sixty consecutively registered patients with sinus rhythm formed the control group. Two independent, blinded readers classified 1,723 coronary artery segments as being of diagnostic or non-diagnostic image quality. All segments with diagnostic image quality were assessed for the presence for significant coronary artery stenosis. Accuracy was calculated using conventional angiography as standard of reference. The percentage of DS CCTA data sets with diagnostic image quality was significantly lower in the study group (79.2%) compared to the control group (90.6%, P < 0.05). The rate of coronary segment with diagnostic image quality was highly significant lower in the study group (89.5%; n = 723/808) compared to the control group (99.4%; n = 908/915; P < 0.001). However, accuracy did not differ in both groups. Significant correlation between non-diagnostic image quality and mean HR was only found in the study group (P = 0.019). The presence of one or more PVCs during CS does not affect accuracy but impairs image quality of subsequent DS CCTA. Mean HR is a predictor of non-diagnostic data sets only in the study group, suggesting more aggressive HR control could be beneficial.


Premature ventricular contraction Coronary calcium score scan Accuracy Dual-source Coronary CT angiography 


  1. 1.
    Achenbach S (2006) Computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 48:1919–1928PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Janne d`Othée B, Siebert U, Cury R et al (2008) A systematic review on diagnostic accuracy of CT-based detection of significant coronary artery disease. Eur J Radiol 65:449–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Orth-Gomer K, Hogstedt C, Boldin L et al (1986) Frequency of extrasystoles in healthy male employees. Br Heart J 55:259–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T et al (2004) Image quality and diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary imaging with 16 detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Cardiovasc Med 91:938–941Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Giesler T, Baum U, Ropers D et al (2002) Noninvasive visualization of coronary arteries using contrast-enhanced MDCT: influence of heart rate on image quality and stenosis detection. AJR 179:911–916PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cadematriri F, Mollet NR, Runza G et al (2006) Improving diagnostic accuracy of MDCT coronary angiography in patients with mild heart rhythm irregularities using ECG editing. AJR 186:634–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mühlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, Soo CS et al (2007) Diagnostic value of 64-slice multi-detector row cardiac CTA in symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 17:603–609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wintersperger BJ, Nikolaou K, Von Ziegler F et al (2006) Image quality, motion artifacts, and reconstruction timing of 64-slice coronary computed tomography angiography with 0.33 second rotation speed. Invest Radiol 41:436–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Donnino R, Jacobs JE, Doshi JV et al (2009) Dual-source versus single-source cardiac CT angiography: comparison of diagnostic image quality. AJR 192:1051–1056PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seifarth H, Wienbeck S, Püsken M et al (2007) Optimal systolic and diastolic reconstruction windows for coronary CT angiography using dual-source CT. AJR 189:1317–1323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Achenbach S, Ropers D, Kuettner A et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced coronary artery visualization by dual-source computed tomography-initial experience. Eur J Radiol 57:390–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H et al (2006) First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16:256–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCollough CH, Schmidt B, Yu L et al (2007) Measurement of temporal resolution in dual source CT. Med Phys 34:4860–4875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weustink AC, Mollet NR, Pugliese et al (2008) Optimal elcectrocardiographic pulsing windows and heart rate: effect on image quality and radiation exposure at coronary CT angiography. Radiology 248:792–798PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heuschmid M, Burgstahler C, Reimann A et al (2007) Usefulness of noninvasive cardiac imaging using dual-source computed tomography in an unselected population with high prevalence of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 100:587–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oncel D, Oncel G, Tastan A et al (2007) Effectiveness of dual-source CT coronary angiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in patients with atrial fibrillation: initial experience. Radiology 245:703–711PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo A et al (2004) Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenosis. Eur Heart J 25:1043–1048PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    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. AJR 179:911–991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scheffel H, Alkahdi H, Leschka S et al (2008) Low-dose CT coronary angiography in the step-and-shoot mode: diagnostic performance. Heart 94:1132–1137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hilden FJ et al (1990) Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 15:827–832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL et al (1975) A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease: report of the ad hoc committee for grading of coronary artery disease, council on cardiovascular surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 51:5–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dotsinsky IA, Stoyanov TV (2004) Ventricular beat detection in single channel elctrocardiograms. Biomed Eng Online 3:3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Becker DE (2006) Fundamentals of electrocardiography Interpretation. Anaesth Prog 53:53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Menzel H, Schibilla H, Teunen D et al (2000) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. European commission 16262, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leber AW, Knez A, Ziegler FZ et al (2005) Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive Coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:147–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 33:363–374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Buerschaper M, Gonska BD, Bethge KP (1991) Prevalence of late potentials in high frequency signal-averaged electrocardiography and arrhythmias in long-term ECG in healthy probands. Z Kardiol 80:516–522PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brodoefel H, Burgstahler C, Tsiflikas I et al (2008) Dual-source CT: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and calcification on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 247:346–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A et al (2006) Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high-pretest probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 16:2739–2747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T et al (2006) Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology 241:378–385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wintersperger BJ, Nikolaou K, von Ziegler F et al (2006) Image quality, motion artifacts, and reconstruction timing of 64-slice coronary computed tomography anigiography with 0.33 second rotation speed. Invest Radiol 41:436–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Artmann A, Enayati S, Ratzenböck M et al (2009) Image quality of CT angiography of coronary arteries depending on the degree of coronary calcification using a dual source CT scanner. Rofo 181:863–869PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Matt D, Scheffel H, Leschka S et al (2007) Dual-source CT coronary angiography: image quality, mean heart rate, and heart rate variability. AJR 189:567–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Eicher
    • 1
  • Thomas Kau
    • 1
  • Martin Niedermayer
    • 1
  • Birgit Senft
    • 2
  • Maria Sinzig
    • 1
  • Birgit Strozyk
    • 1
  • Klaus Armin Hausegger
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyHospital KlagenfurtKlagenfurtAustria
  2. 2.Clinical Psychologist, KlagenfurtViktringAustria

Personalised recommendations