Impact of 64 CT on cardiology

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

josephf1

Junior Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
148
Reaction score
5
Heard in shool today that this could put angio out of business except for balloon/stent insertion? True? What about impact to noninvasive cards?
Thanks

Members don't see this ad.
 
Heard in shool today that this could put angio out of business except for balloon/stent insertion? True? What about impact to noninvasive cards?
Thanks

Can you describe more what it is? It sounds interesting.

I heard that imaging techniques may be more valuable in the future to avoid caths.

I'm a MS2.
 
Can you describe more what it is? It sounds interesting.

The 64-slice CTs work pretty similar to the "old-fashioned" CTs but with the difference of a higher number of detectors (64 instead of 16). This makes it possible to scan a higher number of pictures in the same amount of time (i.e. thinner slices), the result is, most of the time, better imaging thanks to higher resolution. The downfall of is of course increased radiation.

It has been possible to do similar scans with the old CTs but in order to obtain images of acceptable quality for diagnostic purposes the patient often must have been able to take deep breaths for quite some time, have a substantial lower heart rate etc..
 
Members don't see this ad :)
In addition to what Steiner83 said...

The 64-slice "spiral" CTs cover a larger portion of the heart at once compared with a 16-slice CTs (64-slice CTs still require automatic couch motion to image the entire heart).

64-slice CTs acquire images faster, which is important to "freeze" the motion of a beating heart (via ECG gating).

There are now "dual source" 64-slice CTs that acquire images even faster (one often needs to use drugs to slow down beating hearts).

256-slice CTs will be introduced soon that will typically be able to image the entire heart (without any couch motion) and will be much faster.

If one uses the ECG signal to acquire images only during end diastole (avoiding blurring of images caused by contractions) one can acquire spectacular cross sectional images of the heart that are well suited for volumetric (3D) rendering. The anatomy (including the coronary arteries) are very well visualized.

It may obsolete angiography, which is why Cardiologists would like to "own" cardiac CT imaging. This is controversial because in addition to the heart other chest anatomy (e.g. lungs, etc.) is also imaged which Radiologists are much better trained to interpret. Yes, a turf battle is likely...
 
Hmm probably already discussed, but as radiology is evolving will we see procedurs (intervention, imaging etc) being taken over completely by each sub-speciality owning the patient putting radiologists out of work?

How has it been in the past?
 
The 64-slice CTs work pretty similar to the "old-fashioned" CTs but with the difference of a higher number of detectors (64 instead of 16). This makes it possible to scan a higher number of pictures in the same amount of time (i.e. thinner slices), the result is, most of the time, better imaging thanks to higher resolution. The downfall of is of course increased radiation.

It has been possible to do similar scans with the old CTs but in order to obtain images of acceptable quality for diagnostic purposes the patient often must have been able to take deep breaths for quite some time, have a substantial lower heart rate etc..

The 64 slice CT will actually decrease radiologists' productivity because now it would take them many times longer to read each patient's CT (64 instead of 16). This will indirectly lead to reduced income for the radiologists, unless the professional fee reimbursement for 64 slice is much higher than the old 16 slice CTs.
 
The 64 slice CT will actually decrease radiologists' productivity because now it would take them many times longer to read each patient's CT (64 instead of 16). This will indirectly lead to reduced income for the radiologists, unless the professional fee reimbursement for 64 slice is much higher than the old 16 slice CTs.

Are you certain it will take much longer time? Sure thing there will be more slides but arn´t those merged togehter? My impression of the technology is that the quality of imaging will be improved as in a comparison with frames per second and resolution for film/computer games.
 
How common are the 64 slice CT scanners in the US? I know they have been around for at least a year in India. When I was there with my family last December, my Dad got a scan done at a private hospital in Delhi. I know the scan costs less in India than it does in the US, but from the other posts in this thread, it seems as if they are not that common in the US yet. Any thoughts? Do most University hospitals have them? What about community hospitals?
 
Top