TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of digital subtraction angiography, computed tomography angiography, and magnetic resonance angiography in grading of carotid artery stenosis in comparison with actual measurement in an in vitro model
AU - Smith, Jason C.
AU - Watkins, Gregory E.
AU - Smith, Douglas C.
AU - Palmer, Eric W.
AU - Abou-Zamzam, Ahmed M.
AU - Zhao, Cynthia X.
AU - Zhang, Wayne W.
N1 - Copyright © 2012 Annals of Vascular Surgery Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2012/4
Y1 - 2012/4
N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) in grading of carotid stenosis compared with actual measurement in an in vitro model. Methods: Various grades of stenosis were created by adhering different amounts of silicone rubber sealant onto the inner wall of clear, radiolucent tubes. After DSA, CTA, and MRA, the tubes were transected with 1-mm interval through the plaques. The cross-sectional areas were digitally photographed, and the percentage of area reduction of every single slide was measured with ImageJ planimetric software. The maximum actual area reduction (AAR) stenosis of each tube was recorded. The differences among DSA, CTA, MRA, and AAR were compared statistically using paired Student t test. Results: Overall, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the degrees of stenosis compared with AAR (P = 0.001 and P = 0.0009, respectively), and no significant difference was found between DSA and AAR (P = 0.40). In the subgroup with stenosis of 70%, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the stenosis versus AAR (P = 0.004, and P = 0.007 respectively), and DSA significantly overestimated the stenosis (P = 0.0007). Conclusions: This in vitro model study demonstrated that CTA and MRA underestimate the lesions in severe stenosis of >70%. DSA tends to overestimate the disease. The accuracy of DSA is affected by plaque morphology, such as mountain-shaped lesions. © 2011 Annals of Vascular Surgery Inc.
AB - Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) in grading of carotid stenosis compared with actual measurement in an in vitro model. Methods: Various grades of stenosis were created by adhering different amounts of silicone rubber sealant onto the inner wall of clear, radiolucent tubes. After DSA, CTA, and MRA, the tubes were transected with 1-mm interval through the plaques. The cross-sectional areas were digitally photographed, and the percentage of area reduction of every single slide was measured with ImageJ planimetric software. The maximum actual area reduction (AAR) stenosis of each tube was recorded. The differences among DSA, CTA, MRA, and AAR were compared statistically using paired Student t test. Results: Overall, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the degrees of stenosis compared with AAR (P = 0.001 and P = 0.0009, respectively), and no significant difference was found between DSA and AAR (P = 0.40). In the subgroup with stenosis of 70%, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the stenosis versus AAR (P = 0.004, and P = 0.007 respectively), and DSA significantly overestimated the stenosis (P = 0.0007). Conclusions: This in vitro model study demonstrated that CTA and MRA underestimate the lesions in severe stenosis of >70%. DSA tends to overestimate the disease. The accuracy of DSA is affected by plaque morphology, such as mountain-shaped lesions. © 2011 Annals of Vascular Surgery Inc.
KW - Severity of Illness Index
KW - Carotid Stenosis/diagnosis
KW - Predictive Value of Tests
KW - Tomography, X-Ray Computed/instrumentation
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Humans
KW - Magnetic Resonance Angiography/instrumentation
KW - Phantoms, Imaging
KW - Angiography, Digital Subtraction/instrumentation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84862832460
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84862832460#tab=citedBy
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/88e69c7c-c1af-30f5-b428-36ba4727bee9/
U2 - 10.1016/j.avsg.2011.11.008
DO - 10.1016/j.avsg.2011.11.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 22285345
SN - 0890-5096
VL - 26
SP - 338
EP - 343
JO - Annals of Vascular Surgery
JF - Annals of Vascular Surgery
IS - 3
ER -