Coronary computed tomography angiography – Tolerability of β-blockers and contrast media, and temporal changes in radiation dose

References

• Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, Budaj A, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2013;34: 2949–3003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soon K, Wong C. Coronary computed tomography angiography: a new wave of cardiac imaging. Intern Med J. 2012; 42:22–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandgaard NC, Diederichsen AC, Petersen H, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, Mickley H. Patients’ views of cardiac computed tomography angiography compared with conventional coronary angiography. J Thorac Imaging. 2012;27: 36–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora N, Matheny ME, Sepke C, Resnic FS. A propensity analysis of the risk of vascular complications after cardiac catheterization procedures with the use of vascular closure devices. Am Heart J. 2007;153:606–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzberg RW, Newhouse JH. Intravenous contrast medium-induced nephrotoxicity: is the medical risk really as great as we have come to believe? Radiology. 2010;256:21–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Comin J, Williamson EE, Katzberg RW, Murad MH, Kallmes DF. Frequency of acute kidney injury following intravenous contrast medium administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. 2013;267:119–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mark DB, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, Carr JJ, Gerber TC, Hecht HS, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation. 2010;121:2509–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography–an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357: 2277–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M Jr, Detrano R. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:827–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan A, Khosa F, Nasir K, Yassin A, Clouse ME. Comparison of radiation dose and image quality: 320-MDCT versus 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:163–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slocum NK, Grossman PM, Moscucci M, Smith DE, Aronow HD, Dixon SR, et al. The changing definition of contrast-induced nephropathy and its clinical implications: insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2). Am Heart J. 2012; 163:829–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diederichsen AC, Petersen H, Jensen LO, Thayssen P, Gerke O, Sandgaard NC, et al. Diagnostic value of cardiac 64-slice computed tomography: importance of coronary calcium. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2009;43:337–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts WT, Wright AR, Timmis JB, Timmis AD. Safety and efficacy of a rate control protocol for cardiac CT. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:267–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jimenez-Juan L, Nguyen ET, Wintersperger BJ, Moshonov H, Crean AM, Deva DP, et al. Failed heart rate control with oral metoprolol prior to coronary CT angiography: effect of additional intravenous metoprolol on heart rate, image quality and radiation dose. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29:199–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maffei E, Palumbo AA, Martini C, Tedeschi C, Tarantini G, Seitun S, et al. “In-house” pharmacological management for computed tomography coronary angiography: heart rate reduction, timing and safety of different drugs used during patient preparation. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:2931–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pichler P, Pichler-Cetin E, Vertesich M, Mendel H, Sochor H, Dock W, Syeda B. Ivabradine versus metoprolol for heart rate reduction before coronary computed tomography angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109:169–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celik O, Atasoy MM, Erturk M, Yalcin AA, Aksu HU, Diker M, et al. Comparison of different strategies of ivabradine premedication for heart rate reduction before coronary computed tomography angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:77–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liss P, Persson PB, Hansell P, Lagerqvist B. Renal failure in 57 925 patients undergoing coronary procedures using iso-osmolar or low-osmolar contrast media. Kidney Int. 2006;70:1811–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell AM, Jones AE, Tumlin JA, Kline JA. Incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy after contrast-enhanced computed tomography in the outpatient setting. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;5:4–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer BC, Parfrey PS, Hutchinson TA, Baran D, Melanson DM, Ethier RE, Seely JF. Renal function following infusion of radiologic contrast material. A prospective controlled study. Arch Intern Med. 1985;145:87–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller CA, Knapp J, Halliday J, O’Connell D, Heller RF. Failure to demonstrate contrast nephrotoxicity. Med J Aust. 1991;155:329–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bansal GJ, Darby M. Measurement of change in estimated glomerular filtration rate in patients with renal insufficiency after contrast-enhanced computed tomography: a case- control study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009;33:455–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell AM, Kline JA. Contrast-induced nephropathy: doubts and certainties. Acad Emerg Med. 2012;19: 1294–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrington de GA, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in2007. Arch Intern Med.2009;169:2071–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA. 2007; 298:317–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hausleiter J, Meyer TS, Martuscelli E, Spagnolo P, Yamamoto H, Carrascosa P, et al. Image quality and radiation exposure with prospectively ECG-triggered axial scanning for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, multivendor, randomized PROTECTION-III study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:484–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, Schepis T, Pflederer T, Anders K, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:340–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen MY, Shanbhag SM, Arai AE. Submillisievert median radiation dose for coronary angiography with a second- generation 320-detector row CT scanner in 107 consecutive patients. Radiology. 2013;267:76–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs TA, Stehli J, Bull S, Dougoud S, Clerc OF, Herzog BA, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with model-based iterative reconstruction using a radiation exposure similar to chest X-ray examination. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1131–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar