Assessment of three dimensional quantitative coronary analysis by using rotational angiography for measurement of vessel length and diameter

被引:0
作者
Jin Bae Lee
Sung Gug Chang
So Yeon Kim
Young Soo Lee
Jae Kean Ryu
Ji Yong Choi
Kee Sik Kim
Jae Sik Park
机构
[1] Catholic University of Daegu,Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine
[2] Dongguk University,Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine
[3] Kyungpook National University,Department of Physiology, School of Medicine
来源
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging | 2012年 / 28卷
关键词
Quantitative coronary angiography; Intravascular ultrasound; Three-dimensional rotational angiography;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of the three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) system by comparing with that of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) QCA and two-dimensional (2D) QCA. 3D QCA, 2D QCA and IVUS QCA were performed in 45 vessel segments. The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel’s lumen diameter were measured. Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland–Altman analysis. No differences were found in vessel lengths taken by 3D QCA and IVUS QCA (mean difference: 0.29 ± 1.06 mm, P = 0.07). When compared with IVUS QCA, 2D QCA underestimated vessel length (mean difference: −1.78 ± 2.55, P < 0.001). Bland–Altman analysis showed close agreement and a small bias between 3D QCA and IVUS QCA in the measurement of vessel length. The vessel lumen diameter measurements by 2D QCA and 3D QCA were significantly lower than that by IVUS QCA (mean difference: −0.64 ± 0.69, P < 0.001; −0.56 ± 0.52, P < 0.001 respectively). Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.
引用
收藏
页码:1627 / 1634
页数:7
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] Galbraith JE(1978)Coronary angiogram interpretation: interobserver variability JAMA 240 2053-2056
  • [2] Murphy ML(1979)Coronary artery narrowing in coronary heart disease: comparison of cineangiographic and necropsy findings Ann Intern Med 91 350-356
  • [3] de Soyza N(1994)Intravascular ultrasound versus angiography for measurement of luminal diameters in normal and diseased coronary arteries Am Heart J 127 243-251
  • [4] Arnett EN(1995)Atherosclerosis in angiographically “normal” coronary artery reference segments: an intravascular ultrasound study with clinical correlations J Am Coll Cardiol 25 1479-1485
  • [5] Isner JM(2004)Three-dimensional vascular angiography Curr Probl Cardiol 29 104-142
  • [6] Redwood CR(2001)Suitability of the Cordis stabilizer marker guide wire for quantitative coronary angiography calibration: an in vitro and in vivo study Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 52 334-341
  • [7] De Scheerder I(1995)Assessment of coronary artery distensibility by intravascular ultrasound: application of simultaneous measurements of luminal area and pressure Circulation 91 2904-2910
  • [8] De Man F(1991)Intravascular ultrasound assessment of lumen size and wall morphology in normal subjects and patients with coronary artery disease Circulation 84 1087-1099
  • [9] Herregods MC(1997)Comparison of coronary luminal quantification obtained from intracoronary ultrasound and both geometric and videodensitometric quantitative angiography before and after angioplasty and directional atherectomy Circulation 96 491-499
  • [10] Mintz GS(1996)In vivo validation of intravascular ultrasound length measurements using a motorized transducer pullback system Am J Cardiol 77 1115-1118