Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography · 2021
Accuracy of ultra-high-resolution computed tomography with a 0.3-mm detector for quantitative assessment of coronary artery stenosis grading in comparison with conventional computed tomography: A phantom study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yamada Minoru, Yamada Yoshitake, Nakahara Takehiro, Okuda Shigeo, Abe Takayuki, Kuribayashi Sachio, Jinzaki Masahiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The development of ultra-high-resolution CT (U-HRCT) is expected to improve the accuracy of coronary stenosis evaluation. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the stenosis severities of coronary artery phantoms estimated using U-HRCT by comparing them to those estimated with conventional CT.
METHODS: Coronary artery phantoms with non-calcified and calcified lesions were scanned with conventional CT (64-row × 0.625 mm) and U-HRCT (32-row × 0.3125 mm). The coronary artery phantoms had lumen diameters of 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 mm with non-calcified lesions representing 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis and 3.0 and 4.0 mm with calcified lesions representing 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis. The lumen diameters at the stenotic and non-stenotic regions were measured, and the stenosis severities were compared with the true values.
RESULTS: For non-calcified lesions, conventional CT significantly underestimated the stenosis severity in the phantom showing 75% stenosis with lumen diameters of 2.0 and 3.0 mm (p < 0.05), while the estimated stenosis severities were not significantly different from the true values at all settings with U-HRCT. For the calcified lesions, conventional CT overestimated the stenosis severities at all settings (p < 0.05), while U-HRCT yielded estimations closer to the true values, although still with some overestimation (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: By using U-HRCT, the estimated stenosis severities of the coronary artery with non-calcified lesion become almost equal to the true value, while those with calcified lesion are still overestimated although they become closer to the true value.
METHODS: Coronary artery phantoms with non-calcified and calcified lesions were scanned with conventional CT (64-row × 0.625 mm) and U-HRCT (32-row × 0.3125 mm). The coronary artery phantoms had lumen diameters of 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 mm with non-calcified lesions representing 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis and 3.0 and 4.0 mm with calcified lesions representing 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis. The lumen diameters at the stenotic and non-stenotic regions were measured, and the stenosis severities were compared with the true values.
RESULTS: For non-calcified lesions, conventional CT significantly underestimated the stenosis severity in the phantom showing 75% stenosis with lumen diameters of 2.0 and 3.0 mm (p < 0.05), while the estimated stenosis severities were not significantly different from the true values at all settings with U-HRCT. For the calcified lesions, conventional CT overestimated the stenosis severities at all settings (p < 0.05), while U-HRCT yielded estimations closer to the true values, although still with some overestimation (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: By using U-HRCT, the estimated stenosis severities of the coronary artery with non-calcified lesion become almost equal to the true value, while those with calcified lesion are still overestimated although they become closer to the true value.