M B Bastian1, A M König1, S Viniol1, M Gyánó2,3, D Szöllősi4,3, I Góg5,3, J P Kiss3, S Osvath4,3, K Szigeti4,3, A H Mahnken1, R P Thomas6. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Marburg, Philipps University of Marburg, Baldingerstrasse 1, 35043, Marburg, Germany. 2. Department of Interventional Radiology, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 3. Kinepict Health Ltd, Budapest, Hungary. 4. Department of Biophysics and Radiation Biology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 5. Department of Vascular Surgery, Hungarian Defense Forces Medical Centre, Budapest, Hungary. 6. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Marburg, Philipps University of Marburg, Baldingerstrasse 1, 35043, Marburg, Germany. rohit0904@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The presence of metal implants may reduce angiographic image quality due to automated beam adjustments. Digital variance angiography (DVA) is reported to be superior to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) with increased contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether DVA could counterbalance the image quality impairment of lower-limb angiographies with metal implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 2019 to January 2020, 85 raw lower-limb iodine contrast angiograms of 12 patients with metal implants were processed retrospectively with DVA analyses. For objective comparison, CNR of DSA and DVA images was calculated and the ratio CNRDVA/CNRDSA was determined. Visual image quality was evaluated in a paired comparison and by a five-grade Likert scale by three experienced radiologists. RESULTS: The CNR was calculated and compared in 1252 regions of interest in 37 image pairs containing metal implants. The median ratio of CNRDVA/CNRDSA was 1.84 with an interquartile range of 1.35-2.32. Paired comparison resulted in 84.5% in favour of DVA with an interrater agreement of 83.2% (Fleiss κ 0.454, p < 0.001). The overall image quality scores for DSA and DVA were 3.64 ± 0.08 and 4.43 ± 0.06, respectively (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) with consistently higher individual ratings for DVA. CONCLUSION: Our small-sample pilot study shows that DVA provides significantly improved image quality in lower-limb angiography with metal implants, compared to DSA imaging. The improved CNR suggest that this approach could reduce radiation exposure for lower-limb angiography with metal implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4, case studies.
PURPOSE: The presence of metal implants may reduce angiographic image quality due to automated beam adjustments. Digital variance angiography (DVA) is reported to be superior to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) with increased contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether DVA could counterbalance the image quality impairment of lower-limb angiographies with metal implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 2019 to January 2020, 85 raw lower-limb iodine contrast angiograms of 12 patients with metal implants were processed retrospectively with DVA analyses. For objective comparison, CNR of DSA and DVA images was calculated and the ratio CNRDVA/CNRDSA was determined. Visual image quality was evaluated in a paired comparison and by a five-grade Likert scale by three experienced radiologists. RESULTS: The CNR was calculated and compared in 1252 regions of interest in 37 image pairs containing metal implants. The median ratio of CNRDVA/CNRDSA was 1.84 with an interquartile range of 1.35-2.32. Paired comparison resulted in 84.5% in favour of DVA with an interrater agreement of 83.2% (Fleiss κ 0.454, p < 0.001). The overall image quality scores for DSA and DVA were 3.64 ± 0.08 and 4.43 ± 0.06, respectively (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) with consistently higher individual ratings for DVA. CONCLUSION: Our small-sample pilot study shows that DVA provides significantly improved image quality in lower-limb angiography with metal implants, compared to DSA imaging. The improved CNR suggest that this approach could reduce radiation exposure for lower-limb angiography with metal implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4, case studies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Automated exposure control; Contrast-to-noise ratio; Digital variance angiography; Metal implants
Authors: Chiara De Angelis; Francesco Sardanelli; Matteo Perego; Marco Alì; Francesco Casilli; Luigi Inglese; Giovanni Mauri Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-05-27 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Ruediger E Schernthaner; Reham R Haroun; Sonny Nguyen; Rafael Duran; Jae Ho Sohn; Sonia Sahu; Julius Chapiro; Yan Zhao; Alessandro Radaelli; Imramsjah M van der Bom; Maria Mauti; Kelvin Hong; Jean-François H Geschwind; MingDe Lin Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Marcell Gyánó; Csaba Csobay-Novák; Márton Berczeli; István Góg; János P Kiss; Krisztián Szigeti; Szabolcs Osváth; Balázs Nemes Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2020-05-31 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Viktor I Óriás; Dávid Szöllősi; Marcell Gyánó; Dániel S Veres; Sándor Nardai; Csaba Csobay-Novák; Balázs Nemes; János P Kiss; Krisztián Szigeti; Szabolcs Osváth; Péter Sótonyi; Zoltán Ruzsa Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2020-11-17
Authors: Rohit P Thomas; Moritz B Bastian; Simon Viniol; Alexander M König; Sandeep S Amin; Osama Eldergash; Johannes Schnabel; Marcell Gyánó; Dávid Szöllősi; István Góg; János P Kiss; Szabolcs Osváth; Krisztián P Szigeti; Andreas H Mahnken Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2021-10-13 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Marcell Gyánó; Márton Berczeli; Csaba Csobay-Novák; Dávid Szöllősi; Viktor I Óriás; István Góg; János P Kiss; Dániel S Veres; Krisztián Szigeti; Szabolcs Osváth; Ákos Pataki; Viktória Juhász; Zoltán Oláh; Péter Sótonyi; Balázs Nemes Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-11-08 Impact factor: 4.379