Michiko Suzuki1, Ryoichi Tanaka2, Kunihiro Yoshioka2, Akihiko Abiko3, Shigeru Ehara2. 1. Department of Radiology, Iwate Medical University, 19-1 Uchimaru, Morioka, Iwate, 020-8505, Japan. mamimichiko@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Iwate Medical University, 19-1 Uchimaru, Morioka, Iwate, 020-8505, Japan. 3. Department of Cardiology, Memorial Heart Center, Iwate Medical University, 1-2-1 Tyuodori, Morioka, Iwate, 020-8505, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Accurate evaluation of stenosis in severely calcified arteries is a major challenge in conventional CT angiography (CTA) for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of subtraction CTA compared with conventional CTA and conventional angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 175 arterial segments of 31 consecutive patients with PAD who underwent CTA and subsequent digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were evaluated. The percentage stenosis of diseased arteries was measured in iliac arteries with caliper methods on conventional CTA and subtraction CTA, and the concordance of each CTA method with DSA in the identification of >50 % stenosis was evaluated. Interpretation of CTA was always based only on maximum intensity projection (MIP). RESULTS: 174 (99 %) segments were interpretable on subtraction CTA and showed a good correlation with DSA (R (2) = 0.844), although 55 (31 %) segments were not evaluable on conventional CTA due to severe calcification. On subtraction CTA, the segmental accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 90.5, 78.9, and 80.0 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: Subtraction CTA is an accurate diagnostic tool for the evaluation of PAD. It may be easier to interpret stenosis in the presence of calcifications using subtraction CTA rather than with the conventional CTA approach. Also, subtraction CTA using only MIP presented a similar accuracy to DSA.
PURPOSE: Accurate evaluation of stenosis in severely calcified arteries is a major challenge in conventional CT angiography (CTA) for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of subtraction CTA compared with conventional CTA and conventional angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 175 arterial segments of 31 consecutive patients with PAD who underwent CTA and subsequent digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were evaluated. The percentage stenosis of diseased arteries was measured in iliac arteries with caliper methods on conventional CTA and subtraction CTA, and the concordance of each CTA method with DSA in the identification of >50 % stenosis was evaluated. Interpretation of CTA was always based only on maximum intensity projection (MIP). RESULTS: 174 (99 %) segments were interpretable on subtraction CTA and showed a good correlation with DSA (R (2) = 0.844), although 55 (31 %) segments were not evaluable on conventional CTA due to severe calcification. On subtraction CTA, the segmental accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 90.5, 78.9, and 80.0 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: Subtraction CTA is an accurate diagnostic tool for the evaluation of PAD. It may be easier to interpret stenosis in the presence of calcifications using subtraction CTA rather than with the conventional CTA approach. Also, subtraction CTA using only MIP presented a similar accuracy to DSA.
Authors: Michal Tendera; Victor Aboyans; Marie-Louise Bartelink; Iris Baumgartner; Denis Clément; Jean-Philippe Collet; Alberto Cremonesi; Marco De Carlo; Raimund Erbel; F Gerry R Fowkes; Magda Heras; Serge Kownator; Erich Minar; Jan Ostergren; Don Poldermans; Vincent Riambau; Marco Roffi; Joachim Röther; Horst Sievert; Marc van Sambeek; Thomas Zeller Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: S Imakita; Y Onishi; T Hashimoto; S Motosugi; S Kuribayashi; M Takamiya; N Hashimoto; T Yamaguchi; T Sawada Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1998-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Rody Ouwendijk; Marc C J M Kock; Lukas C van Dijk; Marc R H M van Sambeek; Theo Stijnen; M G Myriam Hunink Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-09-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Roberto Iezzi; Marco Santoro; Riccardo Marano; Carmine Di Stasi; Roberta Dattesi; Miles Kirchin; Giovanni Tinelli; Francesco Snider; Lorenzo Bonomo Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-02-13 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alan T Hirsch; Ziv J Haskal; Norman R Hertzer; Curtis W Bakal; Mark A Creager; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; William R C Murphy; Jeffrey W Olin; Jules B Puschett; Kenneth A Rosenfield; David Sacks; James C Stanley; Lloyd M Taylor; Christopher J White; John White; Rodney A White; Elliott M Antman; Sidney C Smith; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Raymond J Gibbons; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon A Hunt; Alice K Jacobs; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-03-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Thom W Rooke; Alan T Hirsch; Sanjay Misra; Anton N Sidawy; Joshua A Beckman; Laura K Findeiss; Jafar Golzarian; Heather L Gornik; Jonathan L Halperin; Michael R Jaff; Gregory L Moneta; Jeffrey W Olin; James C Stanley; Christopher J White; John V White; R Eugene Zierler Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 4.268