C-arm-based flat-panel detector cone-beam computed tomography venography in the diagnosis of iliac vein compression syndrome
10.1097/CM9.0000000000001046
- VernacularTitle:C-arm-based flat-panel detector cone-beam computed tomography venography in the diagnosis of iliac vein compression syndrome
- Author:
Chang-Ming WANG
1
;
Wei-Liang ZHANG
;
Xuan LI
Author Information
1. Department of Interventional Radiology and Vascular Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
- Keywords:
May-Thurner syndrome;
Diagnosis;
Cone-beam computed tomography;
Phlebography
- From:
Chinese Medical Journal
2021;134(4):431-438
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Background::C-arm-based flat-panel detector cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) venography has never been used in the management of iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS). This study aimed to determine the technical feasibility and safety of CBCT venography in the diagnosis of IVCS compared with conventional venography (CV).Methods::Twenty patients with clinical manifestations of lower extremity venous insufficiency were prospectively enrolled between May 2018 and December 2018. Each patient underwent both CV and CBCT venography. The feasibility and safety of CBCT venography were assessed by technical success rate and complication rate. The relationships between the clinical indexes and the results of CBCT venography and CV were analyzed with correlation analysis. The consistency of the diagnosis of IVCS using each modality was analyzed by the kappa test.Results::The technical success rate was 100% for CBCT venography and for CV, without any complications. Compared with CV, CBCT venography was able to show more details of adjacent tissues which might be helpful for making etiological diagnosis. The stenosis rate under CBCT venography had excellent consistency with that under CV (kappa= 0.78, Chi-square test). The stenosis rate under CBCT venography was positively correlated with the presence of collateral veins (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval: [1.00, 1.26], P= 0.049), while the stenosis rate under CV was not. Unexpectedly, only one patient had a venous pressure gradient of more than 2 mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa). Conclusions::For the diagnosis of IVCS, C-arm-based CBCT venography was technically feasible, with good safety. The presence of collateral veins on CBCT was clinically significant. A C-arm fluoroscopy-based technique that combines CV and CBCT might be a promising protocol for the management of IVCS during a single session.
