| Literature DB >> 27718078 |
Marcel T H Oei1, Frederick J A Meijer2, Willem-Jan van der Woude1, Ewoud J Smit1, Bram van Ginneken1, Mathias Prokop1, Rashindra Manniesing1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We present a novel One-Step-Stroke protocol for wide-detector CT scanners that interleaves cerebral CTP with volumetric neck CTA (vCTA). We evaluate whether the resulting time gap in CTP affects the accuracy of CTP values.Entities:
Keywords: Angiography; Brain; Multidetector computed tomography; Perfusion; Stroke
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27718078 PMCID: PMC5409805 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4577-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1Graphical overview of the clinical CTP protocol. The vertical bars denote the individual time points of the protocol; the height of each bar represents the tube current at that time point. The red line is the attenuation curve in the middle cerebral artery in the proximal M1 segment (MCA). For every patient bolus arrival time and peak enhancement in the MCA were determined. The One-Step-Stroke protocol was simulated by eliminating one volumetric acquisition starting from the bolus arrival time up to the fifth time point after peak enhancement of the M1-MCA. These are denoted by the orange bars
Mean, standard deviation and maximum absolute percentage errors
| White Matter | Gray Matter | |
|---|---|---|
| |% error| CBF | 3.1 ± 3.7 (22.2) | 3.5 ± 3.5 (30.1) |
| |% error| CBV | 2.7 ± 3.1 (18.5) | 2.8 ± 3.2 (24.6) |
| |% error| MTT | 1.6 ± 1.4 (7.4) | 2.6 ± 2.4 (13.8) |
Note - Absolute percentage error of CT perfusion values in white matter and gray matter if one time point of the CTP sequence is skipped, averaged for all patients and for all deleted time points. Values shown are the mean ± standard deviations and maximum absolute percentage error in parentheses. Note that despite a low mean across all time points and patients, the maximum error may be substantial
Optimization of timing and threshold for bolus tracking
| 40 HU | 50 HU | 60 HU | 70 HU | 80 HU | 90 HU | 100 HU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 + 2 s | 4.1 ± 2.1 | 4.0 ± 2.8 | 3.9 ± 1.8 |
| 4.2 ± 2.5 | 4.5 ± 2.6 | 5.4 ± 4.7 |
| T0 + 4 s | 4.2 ± 2.8 | 5.5 ± 4.8 | 5.3 ± 4.9 | 5.3 ± 4.9 | 4.8 ± 4.7 | 4.6 ± 4.6 | 4.4 ± 4.3 |
| T0 + 6 s | 4.5 ± 4.5 | 4.8 ± 4.7 | 4.9 ± 4.6 | 4.9 ± 4.6 | 5.3 ± 4.5 | 5.4 ± 4.5 | 6.3 ± 6.4 |
| T0 + 8 s | 6.2 ± 4.5 | 6.2 ± 5.9 | 6.9 ± 6.2 | 7.0 ± 6.2 | 7.1 ± 6.3 | 7.1 ± 6.3 | 5.2 ± 3.1 |
| T0 + 10s | 6.2 ± 6.5 | 4.6 ± 3.5 | 4.4 ± 2.6 | 4.3 ± 2.7 | 4.2 ± 2.4 | 4.0 ± 2.4 | 5.2 ± 4.7 |
Note - For each patient the maximum of the errors of CBV, CBF and MTT was calculated for each combination of enhancement threshold (horizontally) and post-threshold delay (vertically). The table displays the mean ± standard deviation and the range for each combination averaged over all patients. In addition, the number of patients in whom the maximum error exceeded 10 % is listed. Note that the lowest error occurred for a threshold of 70 HU above baseline (green box), which is selected as the optimal timing (one deleted time point, 4 s time gap)
Absolute percentage error of the perfusion values at the optimal timing
| Optimal Time with 4 s Gap | Optimal Time with 6 s Gap | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| White Matter | Gray Matter | White Matter | Gray Matter | |
| |% error| CBF | 2.0 ± 1.5 (5.5) | 3.0 ± 2.1 (7.5) | 3.5 ± 3.5 (13.9) | 3.2 ± 2.3 (8.1) |
| |% error| CBV | 1.6 ± 1.3 (5.7) | 1.9 ± 1.7 (7.2) | 3.4 ± 2.4 (9.1) | 2.8 ± 2.2 (8.1) |
| |% error| MTT | 1.6 ± 1.6 (5.2) | 2.0 ± 1.2 (4.3) | 2.9 ± 2.8 (9.2) | 2.4 ± 1.9 (6.2) |
Note – Data are shown in mean ± standard deviation, with the maximum value in parentheses. The mean across all patients remains low, and the maximum error is ≤7.5 % at optimal time with a 4 s gap and ≤9.2 % at optimal time with a 6 s gap (except for one patient for whom the CBF reached 13.9 %)
Fig. 2Bland Altman plots showing the perfusion values (CBF, CBV and MTT) between the original CTP protocol (the reference standard) and the One-Step-Stroke protocol 6 s time gap
Comparison of perfusion values of the One-Step-Stroke Protocol at optimal time with a 4 s gap with the original protocol
| Optimal Time with 4 s Gap | Optimal Time with 6 s Gap | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spearman correlation | Wilcoxon signed ranked test | Spearman correlation | Wilcoxon signed ranked test | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| White Matter | ||||||
| CBF | .991 | < .0001 | .225 | .971 | < .0001 | .232 |
| CBV | .998 | < .0001 | .644 | .973 | < .0001 | .808 |
| MTT | .963 | < .0001 |
| .907 | < .0001 |
|
| Gray Matter | ||||||
| CBF | .979 | < .0001 | .737 | .961 | < .0001 | .940 |
| CBV | .995 | < .0001 | .647 | .944 | < .0001 | .723 |
| MTT | .986 | < .0001 | .668 | .913 | < .0001 | .765 |
Note – All correlations were found to be significant. Wilcoxon signed ranked test showed no significant differences between the means of the One-Step-Stroke protocol and the original protocol except for MTT in white matter. Despite this significance, the percentage errors remained below 9.2 % for a 6 s time gap, and even 5.2 % for a 4 s time gap (see Table 3)
Fig. 3CT perfusion maps of a 41-year-old female with an infarct in the right MCA territory presented with weakness in left arm and legs and a right-sided face droop. In the upper row perfusion maps of the original CTP protocol are shown (a, b, and c). The lower row (d, e, and f) shows perfusion maps of the same patient in which the second time point was deleted. The perfusion images show an increased MTT with a small area of reduced CBV and CBF in the right MCA territory. Note that the perfusion maps are similar of the original and the perfusion maps with a 6 s gap. WL settings were not changed since the observer was shown the images as the perfusion software calculated the perfusion maps with these WL settings