Prospective randomised comparison of diagnostic confidence and image quality with normal-dose and low-dose CT pulmonary angiography at various body weights.

OBJECTIVES To find a threshold body weight (BW) below 100 kg above which computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) using reduced radiation and a reduced contrast material (CM) dose provides significantly impaired quality and diagnostic confidence compared with standard-dose CTPA. METHODS In this prospectively randomised study of 501 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism and BW <100 kg, 246 were allocated into the low-dose group (80 kVp, 75 ml CM) and 255 into the normal-dose group (100 kVp, 100 ml CM). Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the pulmonary trunk was calculated. Two blinded chest radiologists independently evaluated subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence. Data were compared between the normal-dose and low-dose groups in five BW subgroups. RESULTS Vessel attenuation did not differ between the normal-dose and low-dose groups within each BW subgroup (P = 1.0). The CNR was higher with the normal-dose compared with the low-dose protocol (P < 0.006) in all BW subgroups except for the 90-99 kg subgroup (P = 0.812). Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence did not differ between CT protocols in all subgroups (P between 0.960 and 1.0). CONCLUSIONS Subjective image quality and diagnostic confidence with 80 kVp CTPA is not different from normal-dose protocol in any BW group up to 100 kg. KEY POINTS • 80 kVp CTPA is safe in patients weighing <100 kg • Reduced radiation and iodine dose still provide high vessel attenuation • Image quality and diagnostic confidence with low-dose CTPA is good • Diagnostic confidence does not deteriorate in obese patients weighing <100 kg.

Feasibility of cardiopulmonary exercise testing and training using a robotics-assisted tilt table in dependent-ambulatory stroke patients

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the feasibility of an augmented robotics-assisted tilt table (RATT) for incremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and exercise training in dependent-ambulatory stroke patients. METHODS: Stroke patients (Functional Ambulation Category ≤ 3) underwent familiarization, an incremental exercise test (IET) and a constant load test (CLT) on separate days. A RATT equipped with force sensors in the thigh cuffs, a work rate estimation algorithm and real-time visual feedback to guide the exercise work rate was used. Feasibility assessment considered technical feasibility, patient tolerability, and cardiopulmonary responsiveness. RESULTS: Eight patients (4 female) aged 58.3 ± 9.2 years (mean ± SD) were recruited and all completed the study. For IETs, peak oxygen uptake (V'O2peak), peak heart rate (HRpeak) and peak work rate (WRpeak) were 11.9 ± 4.0 ml/kg/min (45 % of predicted V'O2max), 117 ± 32 beats/min (72 % of predicted HRmax) and 22.5 ± 13.0 W, respectively. Peak ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were on the range "hard" to "very hard". All 8 patients reached their limit of functional capacity in terms of either their cardiopulmonary or neuromuscular performance. A ventilatory threshold (VT) was identified in 7 patients and a respiratory compensation point (RCP) in 6 patients: mean V'O2 at VT and RCP was 8.9 and 10.7 ml/kg/min, respectively, which represent 75 % (VT) and 85 % (RCP) of mean V'O2peak. Incremental CPET provided sufficient information to satisfy the responsiveness criteria and identification of key outcomes in all 8 patients. For CLTs, mean steady-state V'O2 was 6.9 ml/kg/min (49 % of V'O2 reserve), mean HR was 90 beats/min (56 % of HRmax), RPEs were > 2, and all patients maintained the active work rate for 10 min: these values meet recommended intensity levels for bouts of training. CONCLUSIONS: The augmented RATT is deemed feasible for incremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing and exercise training in dependent-ambulatory stroke patients: the approach was found to be technically implementable, acceptable to the patients, and it showed substantial cardiopulmonary responsiveness. This work has clinical implications for patients with severe disability who otherwise are not able to be tested.