Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Radiol.

Sec. Cardiothoracic Imaging

This article is part of the Research TopicEmerging Fast Medical Imaging Techniques in RadiologyView all 7 articles

Application of one heartbeat acquisition with motion correction algorithm in CCTA of patients with atrial fibrillation: Evaluation of coronary artery stenose using Artificial Intelligence Assisted Diagnostic System

Provisionally accepted
Shumeng  ZhuShumeng Zhu1Xing  LiXing Li1Qian  TianQian Tian1Xiaoqian  JiaXiaoqian Jia1Tingting  QuTingting Qu1Jianying  LiJianying Li2Xueyan  ZhangXueyan Zhang1Yannan  ChengYannan Cheng1Le  CaoLe Cao1Lihong  ChenLihong Chen1Jianxin  GuoJianxin Guo1*
  • 1The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China
  • 2CT Research Center, GE Healthcare, Beijing, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Abstract Introduction: Motion artifacts induced by atrial fibrillation (AF) present a substantial challenge in coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Wide detectors, rapid scanning, and motion correction algorithms can effectively improve image quality in CCTA. This study aims to evaluate the impact of one-beat acquisition with a motion correction algorithm (Snapshot Freeze 1, SSF1) on the image quality of prospective CCTA in patients with AF, and its diagnostic performance using an artificial intelligence assisted diagnostic system (AI-ADS). Materials and methods: A total of 91 consecutive patients with AF, who underwent one-beat CCTA were analyzed. Images were reconstructed with SSF1. The subjective and objective image quality of the coronary arteries were evaluated. Using the invasive coronary catheter angiography (ICA) as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of AI-ADS and AI-ADS + radiologist for stenoses above moderate and severe degrees were calculated. Results: Effective radiation dose was 2.43 ± 0.88 mSv. The average CT values of all major coronary arteries and branches were greater than 400HU. All vessels were diagnosable (scores≥3) with good or above ratings at 96.15% (350/364) and 96.70% (352/364). The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and AUC of AI-ADS vs AI-ADS + radiologist for above moderate stenoses were: (84.62% vs 91.21%), (89.61% vs 98.70%), (57.14% vs 50.00%) and (0.73 vs 0.74) on patient level; (84.07% vs 87.64%), (74.07% vs 85.19%), (89.96% vs 89.08%) and (0.82 vs 0.87) on vessel level; (90.84% vs 93.11%), (63.59% vs 78.34%), (95.99% vs 95.91%) and (0.80 vs 0.87) on segment level. For severe stenoses, these values were: (62.64% vs 82.42%), (58.62% vs 91.38%), (69.70% vs 66.67%) and (0.64 vs 0.79) on patient level; (82.97% vs 89.29%), (46.43% vs 75.00%), (93.93% vs 93.57%) and (0.70 vs 0.84) on vessel level; (92.23% vs 95.16%), (36.92% vs 66.92%), (98.06% vs 98.14%) and (0.68 vs 0.83) on segment level. Conclusion: One-beat CCTA with SSF1 provides high-quality coronary images for patients with AF. AI-ADS automatically distinguishes coronary images with different stenoses, but the sensitivity of AI-ADS is low, especially for severe stenoses. AI-ADS + radiologist further improves the diagnostic performance.

Keywords: Atrial Fibrillation, coronary artery CT angiography, artificial intelligence, Diagnostic performance, Motion correction algorithm

Received: 24 Aug 2025; Accepted: 30 Oct 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Zhu, Li, Tian, Jia, Qu, Li, Zhang, Cheng, Cao, Chen and Guo. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Jianxin Guo, gjx1665@xjtufh.edu.cn

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.