High-pitch Helical Dual-source Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare qualitative and quantitative image parameters of dual-source high-pitch helical computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in breath-holding (BH) versus free-breathing (FB) patients. Materials and Methods: Ninety-nine consented patients (61 female individuals; mean age±SD, 49±18.7 y) were randomized into BH (n=45) versus FB (n=54) high-pitch helical CTPA. Patient characteristics and CTPA radiation doses were analyzed. Two readers assessed for pulmonary embolism (PE), transient interruption of contrast, and respiratory and cardiac motion. The readers used a subjective 3-point scale to rate the pulmonary artery opacification and lung parenchymal appearance. A single reader assessed mean pulmonary artery signal intensity, noise, contrast, signal to noise ratio, and contrast to noise ratio. Results: PE was diagnosed in 16% BH and 19% FB patients. CTPAs of both groups were of excellent or acceptable quality for PE evaluation and of similar mean radiation doses (1.3 mSv). Transient interruption of contrast was seen in 5/45 (11%) BH and 5/54 (9%) FB patients (not statistically significant, P=0.54). No statistically significant difference was noted in cardiac, diaphragmatic, and lung parenchymal motion. Lung parenchymal assessment was excellent in all cases, except for 5/54 (9%) motion-affected FB cases with acceptable quality (statistically significant, P=0.03). No CTPA was considered nondiagnostic by any of the readers. No objective image quality differences were noted between both groups (P>0.05). Conclusions: High-pitch helical CTPA acquired during BH or in FB yields comparable image quality for the diagnosis of PE and lung pathology, with low radiation exposure. Only a modest increase in lung parenchymal artifacts is encountered in FB high-pitch helical CTPA.