Objectives The area detector 320‐row CT scanner, which can cover the whole heart in one rotation, can aid in reducing radiation exposure during electrocardiography (ECG)‐gated coronary CT angiography (CCTA). Recently, researchers have proposed dose‐modulated dynamic CCTA with a 320‐row scanner for the detection of functional myocardial ischemia. In the present study, we compared and validated the radiation dose of this method with that of the standard CCTA method and the latest diagnostic reference levels (DRLs). Materials and Methods The study included a total of 164 consecutive patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent CCTA with a 320‐row scanner. The patients were randomly divided into dynamic and standard CCTA groups, and the CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) calculated by the CT system were compared between the two protocols and with the latest DRL. Results Standard and dynamic CCTA scans were performed in 77 and 87 patients, respectively. CTDIvol was significantly higher for standard CCTA than for dynamic CCTA (41 ± 35 mGy vs. 22 ± 7 mGy, p = 0.0014). DLP was also significantly higher for standard CCTA than for dynamic CCTA (864 ± 702 mGy × cm vs. 434 ± 106 mGy × cm, p < .0001). For standard scans, CTDIvol and DLP exceeded the 2020 DRL in Japan in 16% (12/77) and 17% (13/77) of cases, respectively. In contrast, rates for the dynamic scan were only 1% (1/87) for CTDIvol and 0% (0/87) for DLP. Conclusion The dose of radiation exposure during dynamic CCTA with a 320‐row scanner does not exceed that of standard CCTA and is sufficient to meet the latest DRL. Thus, our results suggest that the method is safe from the perspective of radiation exposure.

Aim: To use cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images for treatment planning, the Hounsfield unit (HU)-electron density (ED) calibration table for CBCT should be stable. The purpose of this study was to verify the stability of the HU values for the CBCT system over 1 year and to evaluate the effects of variation in HU-ED calibration curves on dose calculation. Materials and Methods:A tissue characterisation phantom was scanned with the field of view (FOV) of size S (FOV-S) and FOV of size M (FOV-M) using the CBCT system once a month for 1 year. A single field treatment plan was constructed on digital phantom images to validate the dose distribution using mean HU-ED calibration curves and possible variations.Results: HU values for each material rod over the observation period varied with trend. The HU value of the cortical bone rod decreased by about 100 HU for the FOV-S and by about 300 HU for the FOV-M. Possible variation in the HU-ED calibration curves produced a ≤17·9% dose difference in the dose maximum in the treatment plan.Conclusions: The CBCT system should be calibrated periodically for consistent dose calculation.