OBJECTIVE: Qualitative and quantitative image analysis between Iopamidol-370 and Ioversol-320 in stents´ evaluation by coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: Sixty-five patients with low-risk stable angina undergoing stent follow-up with coronary CTA were assigned to Iopamidol I-370 (n = 33) or Ioversol I-320 (n = 32) in this prospective, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized trial. Stent lumen image quality was graded by 5-point Likert Scale. Lumen mean attenuation was measured at native coronary segments: pre-stent, post-stent, distal segments and at coronary plaques. Lumen attenuation increase (LAI) ratio was calculated for all stents. Heart rate (HR) variation, premature heart beats (PHB), heat sensation (HS), blooming and beam hardening were also assessed. RESULTS: Image quality was similar between groups, with no significant difference (Likert score 4.48 ± 0.75 vs 4.54 ± 0.65, p = 0.5). There were similarities in LAI ratio between I-370 and I-320 (0.39 ± 0.42 vs 0.48 ± 0.44 HU, p = 0.08). Regarding lumen mean attenuation at native coronary segments, a significant difference was observed, with I-320 presenting lower values, including contrast mean attenuation in distal segments. After statistical multivariate analysis, three variables correlated with stent image quality: 1) stent diameter, 2) HR variation and 3) stent lumen LAI ratio. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between Iopamidol-370 mgI ml-1 and Ioversol-320 mgI ml-1 contrasts regarding overall stent lumen image quality, which was mainly influenced by stent diameter, HR and LAI ratio.Advances in knowledge:Coronary CTA allows adequate stents' visualization and image quality is influenced by stent diameter, HR variation and LAI ratio.Stents' image quality showed no difference between different concentration contrasts (I-370 vs. I-320); however, higher concentration contrasts may provide an improved overall visualization, especially regarding coronary distal segments.
OBJECTIVE: Qualitative and quantitative image analysis between Iopamidol-370 and Ioversol-320 in stents´ evaluation by coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: Sixty-five patients with low-risk stable angina undergoing stent follow-up with coronary CTA were assigned to Iopamidol I-370 (n = 33) or Ioversol I-320 (n = 32) in this prospective, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized trial. Stent lumen image quality was graded by 5-point Likert Scale. Lumen mean attenuation was measured at native coronary segments: pre-stent, post-stent, distal segments and at coronary plaques. Lumen attenuation increase (LAI) ratio was calculated for all stents. Heart rate (HR) variation, premature heart beats (PHB), heat sensation (HS), blooming and beam hardening were also assessed. RESULTS: Image quality was similar between groups, with no significant difference (Likert score 4.48 ± 0.75 vs 4.54 ± 0.65, p = 0.5). There were similarities in LAI ratio between I-370 and I-320 (0.39 ± 0.42 vs 0.48 ± 0.44 HU, p = 0.08). Regarding lumen mean attenuation at native coronary segments, a significant difference was observed, with I-320 presenting lower values, including contrast mean attenuation in distal segments. After statistical multivariate analysis, three variables correlated with stent image quality: 1) stent diameter, 2) HR variation and 3) stent lumen LAI ratio. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between Iopamidol-370 mgI ml-1 and Ioversol-320 mgI ml-1 contrasts regarding overall stent lumen image quality, which was mainly influenced by stent diameter, HR and LAI ratio.Advances in knowledge:Coronary CTA allows adequate stents' visualization and image quality is influenced by stent diameter, HR variation and LAI ratio.Stents' image quality showed no difference between different concentration contrasts (I-370 vs. I-320); however, higher concentration contrasts may provide an improved overall visualization, especially regarding coronary distal segments.
Authors: Tae-Young Choi; Vincent Woo; Mohit Gupta; Souraya Sourayanezhad; Dong Li; Song S Mao; Matthew Budoff Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2012-05-05 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Allen J Taylor; Manuel Cerqueira; John McB Hodgson; Daniel Mark; James Min; Patrick O'Gara; Geoffrey D Rubin Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2010-11-23
Authors: Cristoph R Becker; Angelo Vanzulli; Christian Fink; Daniele de Faveri; Stefano Fedeli; Roberto Dore; Pietro Biondetti; Alex Kuettner; Martin Krix; Giorgio Ascenti Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Yang Gao; Bin Lu; Zhi Hui Hou; Fang Fang Yu; Wei Hua Yin; Zhi Qiang Wang; Yong Jian Wu; Chao Wei Mu; Felix G Meinel; Andrew D McQuiston; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Fleur R de Graaf; Joëlla E van Velzen; Agnieszka J Witkowska; Joanne D Schuijf; Noortje van der Bijl; Lucia J Kroft; Albert de Roos; Johan H C Reiber; Jeroen J Bax; Greetje J de Grooth; J Wouter Jukema; Ernst E van der Wall Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-07-07 Impact factor: 5.315