Bucek Robert A, Puchner Stefan, Haumer Markus, Reiter Markus, Minar Erich, Lammer Johannes
Department of Angiography and Interventional Radiology, Vienna Medical University, Vienna, Austria.
J Neuroimaging. 2007 Jul;17(3):219-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6569.2007.00124.x.
In contrast to digital subtraction angiography (DSAdia), computed tomography angiography (CTA) provides exact delineation of the perfused lumen in the axial plane, thus allowing luminal (CTAdia) as well as cross-sectional area (CTAarea) internal carotid artery stenosis (ICAS) assessment. The purposes of the present study were to correlate CTAdia and CTAarea with DSAdia and to assess the inter-observer variabilities of both CTA techniques.
In a retrospective analysis, CTA images were reviewed by two observers and ICAS was assessed according to North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial applying CTAdia and CTAarea. DSAdia was assessed by a third observer.
Based on 54 consecutive patients (40 males [74.1%] and 14 females [25.9%]; median age 73.3 years), ICAS percentages of CTAdia and CTAarea revealed significant correlations with DSAdia (r= 0.79-0.87, all P<.001) with median differences in the range of +8% to -6%. Inter-observer agreement was moderate for CTAdia (kappa= 0.60) and excellent for CTAarea (kappa= 0.86). Sensitivity of CTAarea for the detection of ICAS >70% was 100% for both observers, corresponding results for CTAdia were 97.1% and 71.4%, respectively, using DSAdia as the gold standard.
CTAarea assessment of ICAS correlates well with the results of DSAdia and provides an excellent sensitivity for the detection of ICAS >70% with superior inter-observer agreement compared to CTAdia.
与数字减影血管造影(DSAdia)不同,计算机断层血管造影(CTA)能在轴位平面精确描绘灌注管腔,从而实现管腔(CTAdia)以及横截面面积(CTAarea)的颈内动脉狭窄(ICAS)评估。本研究的目的是将CTAdia和CTAarea与DSAdia进行相关性分析,并评估两种CTA技术的观察者间变异性。
在一项回顾性分析中,两名观察者对CTA图像进行评估,并根据北美症状性颈动脉内膜切除术试验应用CTAdia和CTAarea评估ICAS。由第三名观察者评估DSAdia。
基于54例连续患者(40例男性[74.1%]和14例女性[25.9%];中位年龄73.3岁),CTAdia和CTAarea的ICAS百分比与DSAdia显示出显著相关性(r = 0.79 - 0.87,所有P <.001),中位差异在+8%至 -6%范围内。CTAdia的观察者间一致性为中等(kappa = 0.60),CTAarea的观察者间一致性为优秀(kappa = 0.86)。以DSAdia作为金标准,两名观察者CTAarea检测ICAS>70%的敏感性均为100%,CTAdia的相应结果分别为97.1%和71.4%。
CTAarea对ICAS的评估与DSAdia的结果具有良好的相关性,对检测ICAS>70%具有出色的敏感性,与CTAdia相比观察者间一致性更佳。