Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

High-Definition Computed Tomography for Coronary Artery Stent Imaging: a Phantom Study

  • Yang, Wen Jie (Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Medical School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Chen, Ke Min (Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Medical School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Pang, Li Fang (Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Medical School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Guo, Ying (CT Laboratory of GE Healthcare, Beijing Economic and Technology Development Area) ;
  • Li, Jian Ying (CT Laboratory of GE Healthcare, Beijing Economic and Technology Development Area) ;
  • Zhang, Huang (Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Medical School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Pan, Zi Lai (Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Medical School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University)
  • Published : 2012.02.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To assess the performance of a high-definition CT (HDCT) for imaging small caliber coronary stents (${\leq}$ 3 mm) by comparing different scan modes of a conventional 64-row standard-definition CT (SDCT). Materials and Methods: A cardiac phantom with twelve stents (2.5 mm and 3.0 mm in diameter) was scanned by HDCT and SDCT. The scan modes were retrospective electrocardiography (ECG)-gated helical and prospective ECG-triggered axial with tube voltages of 120 kVp and 100 kVp, respectively. The inner stent diameters (ISD) and the in-stent attenuation value ($AV_{in-stent}$) and the in-vessel extra-stent attenuation value ($AV_{in-stent}$) were measured by two observers. The artificial lumen narrowing (ALN = [ISD - $ISD_{measured}$]/ISD) and artificial attenuation increase between in-stent and in-vessel (AAI = $AV_{in-stent}$ - $AV_{in-vessel}$) were calculated. All data was analyzed by intraclass correlation and ANOVA-test. Results: The correlation coefficient of ISD, $AV_{in-vessel}$ and $AV_{in-stent}$ between the two observers was good. The ALNs of HDCT were statistically lower than that of SDCT (30 ${\pm}$ 5.7% versus 35 ${\pm}$ 5.4%, p < 0.05). HDCT had statistically lower AAI values than SDCT (15.7 ${\pm}$ 81.4 HU versus 71.4 ${\pm}$ 90.5 HU, p < 0.05). The prospective axial dataset demonstrated smaller ALN than the retrospective helical dataset on both HDCT and SDCT (p < 0.05). Additionally, there were no differences in ALN between the 120 kVp and 100 kVp tube voltages on HDCT (p = 0.05). Conclusion: High-definition CT helps improve measurement accuracy for imaging coronary stents compared to SDCT. HDCT with 100 kVp and the prospective ECG-triggered axial technique, with a lower radiation dose than 120 kVp application, may be advantageous in evaluating coronary stents with smaller calibers (${\leq}$ 3 mm).

Keywords

References

  1. Holmes DR Jr, Leon MB, Moses JW, Popma JJ, Cutlip D, Fitzgerald PJ, et al. Analysis of 1-year clinical outcomes in the SIRIUS trial: a randomized trial of a sirolimus-eluting stent versus a standard stent in patients at high risk for coronary restenosis. Circulation 2004;109:634-640 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000112572.57794.22
  2. Morice MC, Colombo A, Meier B, Serruys P, Tamburino C, Guagliumi G, et al. Sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions: the REALITY trial: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006;295:895-904 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.8.895
  3. Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, Schatz RA, Savage MP, Penn I, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1994;331:496-501 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199408253310802
  4. King SB 3rd, Smith SC Jr, Hirshfeld JW Jr, Jacobs AK, Morrison DA, Williams DO, et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:172-209 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.10.002
  5. Seifarth H, Ozgun M, Raupach R, Flohr T, Heindel W, Fischbach R, et al. 64- versus 16-slice CT angiography for coronary artery stent assessment: in vitro experience. Invest Radiol 2006;41:22-27 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000191365.88345.e1
  6. Das KM, El-Menyar AA, Salam AM, Singh R, Dabdoob WA, Albinali HA, et al. Contrast-enhanced 64-section coronary multidetector CT angiography versus conventional coronary angiography for stent assessment. Radiology 2007;245:424-432 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2452061389
  7. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Tuinenburg JC, van der Hoeven BL, et al. Evaluation of patients with previous coronary stent implantation with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:416-423 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2452061199
  8. Ehara M, Surmely JF, Kawai M, Katoh O, Matsubara T, Terashima M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population: comparison with conventional invasive angiography. Circ J 2006;70:564-571 https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.70.564
  9. Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Jukema JW, Maffei E, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2204-2210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.045
  10. Wykrzykowska JJ, Arbab-Zadeh A, Godoy G, Miller JM, Lin S, Vavere A, et al. Assessment of in-stent restenosis using 64- MDCT: analysis of the CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:85-92 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2652
  11. Windecker S, Serruys PW, Wandel S, Buszman P, Trznadel S, Linke A, et al. Biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2008;372:1163-1173 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61244-1
  12. Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R, Flohr T, Rink M, Sommer T, et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol 2006;16:818-826 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0062-8
  13. Suzuki S, Furui S, Kaminaga T, Yamauchi T, Kuwahara S, Yokoyama N, et al. Evaluation of coronary stents in vitro with CT angiography: effect of stent diameter, convolution kernel, and vessel orientation to the z-axis. Circ J 2005;69:1124-1131 https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.69.1124
  14. Horiguchi J, Fujioka C, Kiguchi M, Yamamoto H, Kitagawa T, Kohno S, et al. Prospective ECG-triggered axial CT at 140-kV tube voltage improves coronary in-stent restenosis visibility at a lower radiation dose compared with conventional retrospective ECG-gated helical CT. Eur Radiol 2009;19:2363-2372 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1419-1
  15. Suzuki S, Furui S, Kuwahara S, Mehta D, Kaminaga T, Miyazawa A, et al. Coronary artery stent evaluation using a vascular model at 64-detector row CT: comparison between prospective and retrospective ECG-gated axial scans. Korean J Radiol 2009;10:217-226 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2009.10.3.217
  16. Mahesh M, Cody DD. Physics of cardiac imaging with multiple-row detector CT. Radiographics 2007;27:1495-1509 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.275075045
  17. Halliburton SS. Options for reducing patient radiation dose with cardiovascular computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25:153-164 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-009-9450-5
  18. Kerl JM, Schoepf UJ, Vogl TJ, Ackermann H, Vogt S, Costello P, et al. In vitro evaluation of metallic coronary artery stents with 64-MDCT using an ECG-gated cardiac phantom: relationship between in-stent visualization, stent type, and heart rate. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:W256-262 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2318
  19. Maintz D, Burg MC, Seifarth H, Bunck AC, Ozgun M, Fischbach R, et al. Update on multidetector coronary CT angiography of coronary stents: in vitro evaluation of 29 different stent types with dual-source CT. Eur Radiol 2009;19:42-49 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1132-5
  20. Yang WJ, Pan ZL, Zhang H, Pang LF, Guo Y, Chen KM. Evaluation of coronary artery in-stent restenosis with prospectively ECG-triggered axial CT angiography versus retrospective technique: a phantom study. Radiol Med 2011;116:189-196 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0599-8
  21. Horiguchi J, Kiguchi M, Fujioka C, Shen Y, Arie R, Sunasaka K, et al. Radiation dose, image quality, stenosis measurement, and CT densitometry using ECG-triggered coronary 64- MDCT angiography: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:315-320 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2191

Cited by

  1. Imaging of Coronary Stents by Coronary CT-Angiography: Current Status vol.5, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-012-9155-3
  2. Preliminary Application of High-Definition CT Gemstone Spectral Imaging in Hand and Foot Tendons vol.13, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2012.13.6.743
  3. CT Imaging of Coronary Stents: Past, Present, and Future vol.2012, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/139823
  4. High-definition computed tomography for coronary artery stents: image quality and radiation doses for low voltage (100 kVp) and standard voltage (120 kVp) ECG-triggered scanning vol.31, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-015-0686-y
  5. Fabrication and control of CT number through polymeric composites based on coronary plaque CT phantom applications vol.3, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.3.1.016001
  6. Imaging of pediatric great vessel stents: Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging? vol.12, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171138
  7. Diagnostic value of intraluminal stent enhancement in estimating coronary in-stent restenosis vol.10, pp.None, 2020, https://doi.org/10.25259/jcis_153_2019