Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Catholic University of Daegu, Daegu, Korea.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Oct;28(7):1627-34. doi: 10.1007/s10554-011-9993-0. Epub 2011 Dec 18.
The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of the three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) system by comparing with that of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) QCA and two-dimensional (2D) QCA. 3D QCA, 2D QCA and IVUS QCA were performed in 45 vessel segments. The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel's lumen diameter were measured. Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland-Altman analysis. No differences were found in vessel lengths taken by 3D QCA and IVUS QCA (mean difference: 0.29 ± 1.06 mm, P = 0.07). When compared with IVUS QCA, 2D QCA underestimated vessel length (mean difference: -1.78 ± 2.55, P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement and a small bias between 3D QCA and IVUS QCA in the measurement of vessel length. The vessel lumen diameter measurements by 2D QCA and 3D QCA were significantly lower than that by IVUS QCA (mean difference: -0.64 ± 0.69, P < 0.001; -0.56 ± 0.52, P < 0.001 respectively). Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.
本研究旨在通过与血管内超声(IVUS)定量冠状动脉分析(QCA)和二维(2D)QCA 比较,评估三维(3D)定量冠状动脉分析(QCA)系统的准确性。在 45 个血管节段中进行 3D QCA、2D QCA 和 IVUS QCA。测量分支到分支节段血管长度和节段血管近端管腔直径的获得值。使用配对样本 t 检验和 Bland-Altman 分析分析技术间一致性。3D QCA 和 IVUS QCA 测量的血管长度无差异(平均差异:0.29 ± 1.06 mm,P = 0.07)。与 IVUS QCA 相比,2D QCA 低估了血管长度(平均差异:-1.78 ± 2.55,P < 0.001)。Bland-Altman 分析显示 3D QCA 和 IVUS QCA 在血管长度测量方面具有良好的一致性和较小的偏差。2D QCA 和 3D QCA 测量的血管管腔直径明显低于 IVUS QCA(平均差异:-0.64 ± 0.69,P < 0.001;-0.56 ± 0.52,P < 0.001)。旋转血管造影 3D 重建可提供更准确的血管长度测量,而 2D 和 3D QCA 与 IVUS QCA 相比低估了血管管腔直径。