DI-UMONS : Dépôt institutionnel de l’université de Mons

Recherche transversale
(titres de publication, de périodique et noms de colloque inclus)
2018-02-08 - Colloque/Présentation - poster - Anglais - page(s)

Arcolia Roberto, Thayse Kathleen , Brunner Philippe, Godart Pascal, Carlier Stéphane , "Dual axis rotational coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography: a comparative study" in Belgian Society of CArdiology, Brussels, Belgium, 2018

  • Codes CREF : Techniques d'imagerie et traitement d'images (DI2770)
  • Unités de recherche UMONS : Cardiologie (M106)
  • Instituts UMONS : Institut des Sciences et Technologies de la Santé (Santé)
Texte intégral :

Abstract(s) :

(Anglais) Background: Currently, the conventional coronary angiography (CA) remains the gold standard tool for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. However, multiple orthogonal projections with well-documented limitations are required. In this context, dual axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) is a novel coronary angiography technique that involves a high-speed rotation of the X-ray tube around the patient and offers the ability to analyse each coronary artery in different views using a single contrast injection. The objectives of this study were to compare CA versus DARCA in order i) to evaluate the radiation dose of the patient and the interventional medical staff, ii) to compare the amount of contrast administered to the patients, iii) to assess the fluoroscopy and total procedure time, and iv) to evaluate the diagnostic quality for the detection of coronary stenosis. Methods: We prospectively studied 50 patients referred for coronary angiography between February and April 2017 in our center (Hospital Ambroise Paré) and randomly assigned them to either CA (n = 23) or DARCA (n = 27). The radiation dose of the patient and the operator, the dose-area product (DAP), the volume of contrast administered, the fluoroscopy and total procedure time were recorded for each method. Results: We observed a significant decrease in the radiation dose for the interventional cardiologist (CA vs DARCA, 17.2 ± 42.0 μSv vs 3.0 ± 4.3, p=0.001) [Table 1]. No significant differences were found for the other parameters [Table 1]. Nevertheless, we noted that our experimental data for the radiation dose of the patient and the DAP in the conventional group (CA) were lower in our current study than in those reported by other research teams indicating that our new generation standard coronary angiography system already irradiates less. Otherwise, we observed that a single rotational view of left and right coronary arteries was insufficient in 35% of cases in the rotational group (DARCA, 7/27 cases). Three patients required an additional image acquisition and four of them required at least two additional image acquisitions. Conclusions: The findings suggest that dual axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) provides better radioprotection for the interventional cardiologist compared to conventional coronary angiography, without impairing the diagnostic performance.