A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Fat volume measurements as a predictor of image noise in coronary computed tomography angiography. | LitMetric

Introduction: Image noise can negatively affect the overall quality of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA).

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between image noise and fat volumes in the chest wall. We also aimed to compare these with other patient-specific predictors of image noise, such as body weight (BW) and body mass index (BMI).

Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional, single-center study. A tube voltage of 100 kV was used for patients with BW <85 kg and 120 kV for BW ≥85 kg. The image noise in the aortic root, single-slice fat volume (SFV) at the level of the left main coronary artery and the total fat volume of the chest (TFV) were analyzed.

Results: A total of 132 consecutive patients were enrolled (mean age ± standard deviation, 51 ± 11 years; 64% male). The mean image noise was 30.5 ± 11 Hounsfield units (HU). We found that patients with image noise >30 HU had significantly higher SFV (75 ± 33 vs. 51 ± 24,  < 0.0001) and TFV (2206 ± 927 vs. 1815 ± 737,  < 0.01) compared with patients having noise ≤30 HU, whereas BW and BMI showed no significant difference (78 ± 13 vs. 81 ± 14,  < 0.34) and (28.7 ± 4.7 vs. 26.8 ± 3.8,  < 0.19), respectively. Linear regression analysis showed that image noise has better correlation with SFV ( = 0.399;  < 0.0001); and TFV ( = 0,  < 0.009) than BMI ( = 0.154,  < 0.039) and BW ( = -0.102,  = 0.12).

Conclusions: Fat volume measurements of the chest wall can predict CCTA image noise better than other patient-specific predictors, such as BW and BMI.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6289940PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2018.11.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

image noise
16
coronary computed
8
computed tomography
8
tomography angiography
8
fat volume
4
volume measurements
4
measurements predictor
4
image
4
predictor image
4
noise
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!