| Literature DB >> 33469281 |
Franz Wegner1, Anselm von Gladiss2, Julian Haegele1,3, Ulrike Grzyska1, Malte Maria Sieren1, Erik Stahlberg1, Thekla Helene Oechtering1, Kerstin Lüdtke-Buzug2, Joerg Barkhausen1, Thorsten M Buzug2,4, Thomas Friedrich2,4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Endovascular stents are medical devices, which are implanted in stenosed blood vessels to ensure sufficient blood flow. Due to a high rate of in-stent re-stenoses, there is the need of a noninvasive imaging method for the early detection of stent occlusion. The evaluation of the stent lumen with computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is limited by material-induced artifacts. The purpose of this work is to investigate the potential of the tracer-based modality magnetic particle imaging (MPI) for stent lumen visualization and quantification.Entities:
Keywords: artifacts; endovascular stents; lumen quantification; magnetic particle imaging; superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33469281 PMCID: PMC7810673 DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S284694
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Nanomedicine ISSN: 1176-9114
Detailed Information of the Investigated Stents Including Stent Type, Material, Abbreviation (First Letters of Stent Name, Diameter/Length in mm), Number of Frequency Components Generated by the Stents and Relative Measurement Error of the Lumen Quantification (Calculated vs Nominal Lumen Diameter)
| Stent Type | Material | Abbreviation | Nr. Freq. Comp. SNR >5 | Relative Measurement Error (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biosensors, Biomatrix Neoflex | 316L | BiN 3/28 | 0 | −3 |
| Biosensors, BioFreedom | 316L | BiF 3.5/11 | 1 | 23 |
| Boston Scientific, Taxus Liberté | 316L | TaL 4/38 | 0 | −3 |
| Boston Scientific, Taxus Liberté | 316L | TaL 5/32 | 0 | −13 |
| Boston Scientific, Express LD Vascular | 316L | ELV 7/57 | 0 | −10 |
| Boston Scientific, Express LD Vascular | 316L | ELV 10/37 | 0 | −7 |
| IDEV, Supera | Nitinol | Sup 4/40 | 0 | −5 |
| Gore, Tigris | Nitinol | Tig 5/40 | 0 | −13 |
| IDEV, Supera | Nitinol | Sup 5/60 | 0 | −5 |
| IDEV, Supera | Nitinol | Sup 6/40 | 1 | 0 |
| Gore, Tigris | Nitinol | Tig 6/40 | 2 | −9 |
| Gore, Tigris | Nitinol | Tig 7/40 | 3 | −10 |
| Boston Scientific, Epic | Nitinol | Epi 7/99 | 0 | −3 |
| Gore, Tigris | Nitinol | Tig 8/40 | 2 | −3 |
| Boston Scientific, Promus Premier | PtCr | PrP 3/28 | 1 | 13 |
| Boston Scientific, Promus Element Plus | PtCr | PEP 3/32 | 0 | 16 |
| Boston Scientific, Synergy | PtCr | Syn 3/38 | 0 | 28 |
| Boston Scientific, Promus Element Plus | PtCr | PEP 4/28 | 1 | −3 |
| Boston Scientific, Promus Premier | PtCr | PrP 4/28 | 0 | −13 |
| Boston Scientific, Rebel | PtCr | Reb 4/28 | 0 | −3 |
| Boston Scientific, Carotid Wallstent | CoCr | CaW 7/30 | 0 | −4 |
Abbreviations: 316L, stainless steel; PtCr, platinum-chromium; CoCr, cobalt-chromium; SNR, signal-to-noise-ratio.
Figure 1Image of a reference phantom (top) and a stented vessel phantom (bottom, Taxus Liberté 5/32), both filled with tracer dilution (1:100, Resovist, I’rom Pharmaceuticals, Tokyo, Japan). The stented phantom has a slightly curved shape caused by the storage of the phantoms as wound tubes. For imaging, all phantoms were straightly aligned on a dedicated phantom holder.
Figure 2SNR of the frequency components generated by the stents (without tracer) and the tracer dilution (Resovist). The majority of frequency components generated by the stents was below the threshold of SNR=5 (colored lines). Only up to three single frequency components (per stent) were above the chosen threshold value (colored cross markers).
Figure 3Signal intensity profiles of 11 central slices which were used for data analysis are exemplarily shown for the Taxus Liberté 5/32.
Figure 4Calculated FWXM (X=39.2%) for all phantoms. This value was chosen to distinguish between phantom lumen and surrounding in this work.
Figure 5Calculated and nominal lumen diameter of all phantoms. Pearson’s correlation coefficient described the correlation of both with a value of r=0.98.
Figure 6MPI images (MIP of xz-planes) of all stented phantoms and a corresponding reference phantom for each diameter. There was no visual difference between the stented phantoms and the reference phantoms. Artifacts at the ends of the stents were increasing with increasing phantom diameter.