| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1
College of Medicine, Penn State University, Hershey, PA 17033.
2
Department of Radiology, H066, Penn State University, P. O. Box 850, Hershey,
PA 17033.
3
Department of Health Evaluation Sciences, A210, Penn State University,
Hershey, PA 17033.
OBJECTIVE. Five image reconstruction techniques have been used with CT angiography: axial (cross-sectional), maximum intensity projection (MIP), curved multiplanar reconstruction (MPR), shaded-surface display, and volume rendering. This study used a phantom to compare the accuracy of these techniques for measuring stenosis.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS. A 19-vessel phantom containing various grades of concentric stenoses (0-100%) and three lengths (5, 7.5, and 10 mm) of stenoses was used for this study. Scans were obtained with a slice thickness of 2.0 mm, slice interval of 1.0 mm, pitch of 1.0, 120 kVp, 200 mA, and with the vessels oriented parallel to the z-axis and opacified with nonionic contrast material. CT angiography images were produced using five optimized techniques: axial, MIP, MPR, shaded-surface display, and volume rendering; and measurements were made with an electronic cursor in the normal lumen and mid stenosis by five separate investigators who were unaware of vessel and stenosis diameters. Each of the techniques was first optimized according to the radiology literature and our own preliminary testing.
RESULTS. For vessels greater than 4 mm in diameter, axial, MIP, MPR,
shaded-surface display, and volume-rendering CT angiography techniques all had
a measurement error of less than 2.5%. However, axial, MIP, MPR, and
shaded-surface display techniques were less accurate in estimating smaller
(
4 mm) diameters. Volume rendering tended to be more accurate in the
measurement of vessels with a 2.0- to 4.0-mm diameter and was statistically
more accurate for diameters of 0.5-1.0 mm (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION. All five CT angiography display techniques (axial, MIP, MPR, shaded-surface display, and volume rendering) accurately display vessels and stenoses greater than 4 mm in diameter. However, volume rendering tends to be more accurate for stenoses of 2-4 mm and was statistically better in the measurement of diameters of 0.5-1.0 mm (p < 0.001). Volume rendering is an accurate method for evaluating all grades of stenoses.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Ferencik, D. Ropers, S. Abbara, R. C. Cury, U. Hoffmann, K. Nieman, T. J. Brady, F. Moselewski, W. G. Daniel, and S. Achenbach Diagnostic Accuracy of Image Postprocessing Methods for the Detection of Coronary Artery Stenoses by Using Multidetector CT Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 696 - 702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Saba, G. Caddeo, R. Sanfilippo, R. Montisci, and G. Mallarini Efficacy and Sensitivity of Axial Scans and Different Reconstruction Methods in the Study of the Ulcerated Carotid Plaque Using Multidetector-Row CT Angiography: Comparison with Surgical Results AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., April 1, 2007; 28(4): 716 - 723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. P. Villablanca, F. J. Rodriguez, T. Stockman, S. Dahliwal, M. Omura, S. Hazany, and J. Sayre MDCT Angiography for Detection and Quantification of Small Intracranial Arteries: Comparison with Conventional Catheter Angiography Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 593 - 602. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 American Society of Interventional & Therapeutic N, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interve, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology, E. R. Bates, J. D. Babb, D. E. Casey Jr, C. U. Cates, G. R. Duckwiler, T. E. Feldman, et al. ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Carotid Stenting: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN Clinical Expert Consensus Document Committee on Carotid Stenting) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 2, 2007; 49(1): 126 - 170. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. K. Fishman, D. R. Ney, D. G. Heath, F. M. Corl, K. M. Horton, and P. T. Johnson Volume rendering versus maximum intensity projection in CT angiography: what works best, when, and why. RadioGraphics, May 1, 2006; 26(3): 905 - 922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B.B. Ertl-Wagner, R. Bruening, J. Blume, R.-T. Hoffmann, S. Mueller-Schunk, B. Snyder, and M.F. Reiser Relative Value of Sliding-Thin-Slab Multiplanar Reformations and Sliding-Thin-Slab Maximum Intensity Projections as Reformatting Techniques in Multisection CT Angiography of the Cervicocranial Vessels AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2006; 27(1): 107 - 113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. P. Lawler, H. K. Pannu, and E. K. Fishman MDCT Evaluation of the Coronary Arteries, 2004: How We Do It--Data Acquisition, Postprocessing, Display, and Interpretation Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2005; 184(5): 1402 - 1412. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V A Duddalwar Multislice CT angiography: a practical guide to CT angiography in vascular imaging and intervention Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2004; 77(suppl_1): S27 - S38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. K. Kim, J. H. Kim, S.-J. Bae, and K.-S. Cho CT Angiography for Evaluation of Living Renal Donors: Comparison of Four Reconstruction Methods Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2004; 183(2): 471 - 477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. W. Olin, J. A. Kaufman, D. A. Bluemke, R. O. Bonow, M. D. Gerhard, M. R. Jaff, G. D. Rubin, and W. Hall Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease Conference: Writing Group IV: Imaging Circulation, June 1, 2004; 109(21): 2626 - 2633. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. F. Tomandl, N. C. Kostner, M. Schempershofe, W. J. Huk, C. Strauss, L. Anker, and P. Hastreiter CT Angiography of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Focus on Postprocessing RadioGraphics, May 1, 2004; 24(3): 637 - 655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Mallouhi, M. Rieger, B. Czermak, M. C. Freund, P. Waldenberger, and W. R. Jaschke Volume-Rendered Multidetector CT Angiography: Noninvasive Follow-Up of Patients Treated with Renal Artery Stents Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2003; 180(1): 233 - 239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Corti, M. Alerci, R. Wyttenbach, P. L. Pedrazzi, A. Gallino, T. Hirai, and Y. Korogi Usefulness of Multiplanar Reconstructions in Evaluation of Carotid CT Angiography * Drs Hirai and Korogi respond: Radiology, January 1, 2003; 226(1): 290 - 292. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. D. Cody AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT: Image Processing in CT RadioGraphics, September 1, 2002; 22(5): 1255 - 1268. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Hochmuth, U. Spetzger, and M. Schumacher Comparison of Three-Dimensional Rotational Angiography with Digital Subtraction Angiography in the Assessment of Ruptured Cerebral Aneurysms AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., August 1, 2002; 23(7): 1199 - 1205. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
