Division of Image Processing, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Aug;28(6):1315-27. doi: 10.1007/s10554-012-0016-6. Epub 2012 Jan 20.
This study sought to compare lumen dimensions as assessed by 3D quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT), and to assess the association of the discrepancy with vessel curvature. Coronary lumen dimensions often show discrepancies when assessed by X-ray angiography and by IVUS or OCT. One source of error concerns a possible mismatch in the selection of corresponding regions for the comparison. Therefore, we developed a novel, real-time co-registration approach to guarantee the point-to-point correspondence between the X-ray, IVUS and OCT images. A total of 74 patients with indication for cardiac catheterization were retrospectively included. Lumen morphometry was performed by 3D QCA and IVUS or OCT. For quantitative analysis, a novel, dedicated approach for co-registration and lumen detection was employed allowing for assessment of lumen size at multiple positions along the vessel. Vessel curvature was automatically calculated from the 3D arterial vessel centerline. Comparison of 3D QCA and IVUS was performed in 519 distinct positions in 40 vessels. Correlations were r = 0.761, r = 0.790, and r = 0.799 for short diameter (SD), long diameter (LD), and area, respectively. Lumen sizes were larger by IVUS (P < 0.001): SD, 2.51 ± 0.58 mm versus 2.34 ± 0.56 mm; LD, 3.02 ± 0.62 mm versus 2.63 ± 0.58 mm; Area, 6.29 ± 2.77 mm(2) versus 5.08 ± 2.34 mm(2). Comparison of 3D QCA and OCT was performed in 541 distinct positions in 40 vessels. Correlations were r = 0.880, r = 0.881, and r = 0.897 for SD, LD, and area, respectively. Lumen sizes were larger by OCT (P < 0.001): SD, 2.70 ± 0.65 mm versus 2.57 ± 0.61 mm; LD, 3.11 ± 0.72 mm versus 2.80 ± 0.62 mm; Area 7.01 ± 3.28 mm(2) versus 5.93 ± 2.66 mm(2). The vessel-based discrepancy between 3D QCA and IVUS or OCT long diameters increased with increasing vessel curvature. In conclusion, our comparison of co-registered 3D QCA and invasive imaging data suggests a bias towards larger lumen dimensions by IVUS and by OCT, which was more pronounced in larger and tortuous vessels.
本研究旨在比较三维定量冠状动脉造影（QCA）和血管内超声（IVUS）或光相干断层扫描（OCT）评估的管腔尺寸，并评估管腔尺寸差异与血管弯曲之间的关系。当通过 X 射线血管造影和 IVUS 或 OCT 评估时，冠状动脉管腔尺寸经常存在差异。误差的一个来源涉及用于比较的对应区域选择的可能不匹配。因此，我们开发了一种新的实时配准方法，以保证 X 射线、IVUS 和 OCT 图像之间的点对点对应。总共回顾性纳入了 74 例有心脏导管插入术适应证的患者。通过 3D QCA 和 IVUS 或 OCT 进行管腔形态测量。对于定量分析，采用了一种新的专用配准和管腔检测方法，允许在血管的多个位置评估管腔大小。从 3D 动脉血管中心线自动计算血管弯曲度。在 40 个血管的 519 个不同位置进行 3D QCA 和 IVUS 的比较。短直径（SD）、长直径（LD）和面积的相关性分别为 r = 0.761、r = 0.790 和 r = 0.799。管腔尺寸通过 IVUS 测量更大（P < 0.001）：SD，2.51 ± 0.58mm 比 2.34 ± 0.56mm；LD，3.02 ± 0.62mm 比 2.63 ± 0.58mm；面积，6.29 ± 2.77mm(2)比 5.08 ± 2.34mm(2)。在 40 个血管的 541 个不同位置进行 3D QCA 和 OCT 的比较。SD、LD 和面积的相关性分别为 r = 0.880、r = 0.881 和 r = 0.897。管腔尺寸通过 OCT 测量更大（P < 0.001）：SD，2.70 ± 0.65mm 比 2.57 ± 0.61mm；LD，3.11 ± 0.72mm 比 2.80 ± 0.62mm；面积 7.01 ± 3.28mm(2)比 5.93 ± 2.66mm(2)。3D QCA 和 IVUS 或 OCT 长直径之间基于血管的差异随着血管弯曲度的增加而增加。总之，我们对配准的 3D QCA 和侵入性成像数据的比较表明，IVUS 和 OCT 测量的管腔尺寸存在较大的偏差，在较大和扭曲的血管中更为明显。
