Coronary Artery Stent Evaluation Using a Vascular Model at 64-Detector Row CT: Comparison between Prospective and Retrospective ECG-Gated Axial Scans.
10.3348/kjr.2009.10.3.217
- Author:
Shigeru SUZUKI
1
;
Shigeru FURUI
;
Sadatoshi KUWAHARA
;
Dhruv MEHTA
;
Tatsuro KAMINAGA
;
Akiyoshi MIYAZAWA
;
Yasunari UENO
;
Kumiko KONNO
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo 173-8605, Japan. s-suzuki@med.teikyo-u.ac.jp
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Evaluation Studies
- Keywords:
Computed tomography (CT), angiography;
Experimental studies;
Stent;
Multi-slice CT (MSCT)
- MeSH:
Contrast Media;
*Coronary Angiography;
Coronary Stenosis;
Coronary Vessels;
Electrocardiography/*methods;
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods;
*Models, Cardiovascular;
Observer Variation;
Phantoms, Imaging;
Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods;
*Stents;
Tomography, Spiral Computed/*methods
- From:Korean Journal of Radiology
2009;10(3):217-226
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: We wanted to evaluate the performance of prospective electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated axial scans for assessing coronary stents as compared with retrospective ECG-gated helical scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As for a vascular model of the coronary artery, a tube of approximately 2.5-mm inner diameter was adopted and as for stents, three (Bx-Velocity, Express2, and Micro Driver) different kinds of stents were inserted into the tube. Both patent and stenotic models of coronary artery were made by instillating different attenuation (396 vs. 79 Hounsfield unit [HU]) of contrast medium within the tube in tube model. The models were scanned with two types of scan methods with a simulated ECG of 60 beats per minute and using display field of views (FOVs) of 9 and 18 cm. We evaluated the in-stent stenosis visually, and we measured the attenuation values and the diameter of the patent stent lumen. RESULTS: The visualization of the stent lumen of the vascular models was improved with using the prospective ECG-gated axial scans and a 9-cm FOV. The inner diameters of the vascular models were underestimated with mean measurement errors of -1.10 to -1.36 mm. The measurement errors were smaller with using the prospective ECG-gated axial scans (Bx-Velocity and Express2, p < 0.0001; Micro Driver, p = 0.0004) and a 9-cm FOV (all stents: p < 0.0001), as compared with the other conditions, respectively. The luminal attenuation value was overestimated in each condition. For the luminal attenuation measurement, the use of prospective ECG-gated axial scans provided less measurement error compared with the retrospective ECG-gated helical scans (all stents: p < 0.0001), and the use of a 9-cm FOV tended to decrease the measurement error. CONCLUSION: The visualization of coronary stents is improved by the use of prospective ECG-gated axial scans and using a small FOV with reduced blooming artifacts and increased spatial resolution.
