PURPOSE: Coronary angiography with multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT-CA) allows quantification of coronary artery stenosis with a high level of accuracy; however, a better estimation of stenosis can be achieved by using appropriate reformatting filters, especially in stents and calcified segments. Quantitative computed tomography angiography (QCTA) is intended to overcome the limitations of the visual score. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of QCTA with different filters in comparison with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and visual score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two blinded operators visually scored 17 consecutive patients referred for MDCT-CA with a per-segment analysis. The degree of stenosis was classified as 0-20%, 20-50% (wall irregularities), 50-70% (significant disease) and 70-100% (vessel occlusion). Each segment was then analysed using the electronic callipers of the QCTA system with 15 different filters. No contour editing was performed. Data were compared with QCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA). Comparison between QCTA, visual score and QCA were performed using Spearman's rank correlation. RESULTS: Of 25 segments analysed (mean 1.4 diseased segment per patient), 375 measurements were considered. Good correlation was found between the visual score and QCA [Pearson correlation coefficient (rho=0.852; p<0.0001)] and between QCA and CCA (rho=0.804; p<0.0001). Moderate correlation was found between QCA and QCTA only using two filters (rho=0.444; p<0.0001 for YA filter and rho=0.450; p<0.0001 for YB filter). CONCLUSIONS: Overall QCTA accuracy is low if contour editing is not applied, especially in calcified vessels. Certain filters can help to better estimate the exact percentage of stenosis.
PURPOSE: Coronary angiography with multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT-CA) allows quantification of coronary artery stenosis with a high level of accuracy; however, a better estimation of stenosis can be achieved by using appropriate reformatting filters, especially in stents and calcified segments. Quantitative computed tomography angiography (QCTA) is intended to overcome the limitations of the visual score. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of QCTA with different filters in comparison with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and visual score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two blinded operators visually scored 17 consecutive patients referred for MDCT-CA with a per-segment analysis. The degree of stenosis was classified as 0-20%, 20-50% (wall irregularities), 50-70% (significant disease) and 70-100% (vessel occlusion). Each segment was then analysed using the electronic callipers of the QCTA system with 15 different filters. No contour editing was performed. Data were compared with QCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA). Comparison between QCTA, visual score and QCA were performed using Spearman's rank correlation. RESULTS: Of 25 segments analysed (mean 1.4 diseased segment per patient), 375 measurements were considered. Good correlation was found between the visual score and QCA [Pearson correlation coefficient (rho=0.852; p<0.0001)] and between QCA and CCA (rho=0.804; p<0.0001). Moderate correlation was found between QCA and QCTA only using two filters (rho=0.444; p<0.0001 for YA filter and rho=0.450; p<0.0001 for YB filter). CONCLUSIONS: Overall QCTA accuracy is low if contour editing is not applied, especially in calcified vessels. Certain filters can help to better estimate the exact percentage of stenosis.
Authors: Harald Seifarth; Rainer Raupach; Stefan Schaller; Eva Maria Fallenberg; Thomas Flohr; Walter Heindel; Roman Fischbach; David Maintz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-02-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: F Cademartiri; R Marano; G Runza; N Mollet; K Nieman; G Luccichenti; M Gualerzi; L Brambilla; P Coruzzi; M Galia; M Midiri Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Stephen Schroeder; Stephan Achenbach; Frank Bengel; Christof Burgstahler; Filippo Cademartiri; Pim de Feyter; Richard George; Philipp Kaufmann; Andreas F Kopp; Juhani Knuuti; Dieter Ropers; Joanne Schuijf; Laurens F Tops; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-12-15 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Sebastian Leschka; Hans Scheffel; Lotus Desbiolles; Andre Plass; Oliver Gaemperli; Ines Valenta; Lars Husmann; Thomas G Flohr; Michele Genoni; Borut Marincek; Philipp A Kaufmann; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Stephanie Busch; Thorsten R C Johnson; Konstantin Nikolaou; Franz von Ziegler; Andreas Knez; Maximilian F Reiser; Christoph R Becker Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2006-12-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: M Gilard; J C Cornily; P Y Pennec; G Le Gal; M Nonent; J Mansourati; J J Blanc; J Boschat Journal: Heart Date: 2005-04-21 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Lars Husmann; Oliver Gaemperli; Tiziano Schepis; Hans Scheffel; Ines Valenta; Tobias Hoefflinghaus; Paul Stolzmann; Lotus Desbiolles; Bernhard A Herzog; Sebastian Leschka; Borut Marincek; Hatem Alkadhi; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-06-19 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: F Cademartiri; A Palumbo; E Maffei; L La Grutta; G Runza; F Pugliese; M Midiri; N R A Mollet; W B Meijboom; A Menozzi; L Vignali; C Reverberi; D Ardissino; G P Krestin Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2007-06-11 Impact factor: 6.313