Smith Jason C, Watkins Gregory E, Smith Douglas C, Palmer Eric W, Abou-Zamzam Ahmed M, Zhao Cynthia X, Zhang Wayne W
Department of Radiology, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2012 Apr;26(3):338-43. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2011.11.008. Epub 2012 Jan 30.
The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) in grading of carotid stenosis compared with actual measurement in an in vitro model.
Various grades of stenosis were created by adhering different amounts of silicone rubber sealant onto the inner wall of clear, radiolucent tubes. After DSA, CTA, and MRA, the tubes were transected with 1-mm interval through the plaques. The cross-sectional areas were digitally photographed, and the percentage of area reduction of every single slide was measured with ImageJ planimetric software. The maximum actual area reduction (AAR) stenosis of each tube was recorded. The differences among DSA, CTA, MRA, and AAR were compared statistically using paired Student t test.
Overall, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the degrees of stenosis compared with AAR (P = 0.001 and P = 0.0009, respectively), and no significant difference was found between DSA and AAR (P = 0.40). In the subgroup with stenosis of <70%, there was no significant difference between DSA, CTA, and MRA versus AAR (P = 0.18, P = 0.16, and P = 0.08, respectively). In the subgroup with severe stenosis of >70%, CTA and MRA significantly underestimated the stenosis versus AAR (P = 0.004, and P = 0.007 respectively), and DSA significantly overestimated the stenosis (P = 0.0007).
This in vitro model study demonstrated that CTA and MRA underestimate the lesions in severe stenosis of >70%. DSA tends to overestimate the disease. The accuracy of DSA is affected by plaque morphology, such as mountain-shaped lesions.
本研究旨在在体外模型中,将数字减影血管造影(DSA)、计算机断层血管造影(CTA)和磁共振血管造影(MRA)与实际测量结果相比较,研究其在颈动脉狭窄分级中的准确性。
通过将不同量的硅橡胶密封剂粘贴到透明的、可透射线的管内壁上,制造出不同等级的狭窄。在进行DSA、CTA和MRA检查后,将管子以1毫米的间隔穿过斑块进行横切。对横截面区域进行数码拍照,并使用ImageJ平面测量软件测量每张切片的面积减少百分比。记录每根管的最大实际面积减少(AAR)狭窄程度。使用配对学生t检验对DSA、CTA、MRA和AAR之间的差异进行统计学比较。
总体而言,与AAR相比,CTA和MRA显著低估了狭窄程度(分别为P = 0.001和P = 0.0009),DSA与AAR之间未发现显著差异(P = 0.40)。在狭窄程度<70%的亚组中,DSA、CTA和MRA与AAR之间无显著差异(分别为P = 0.18、P = 0.16和P = 0.08)。在狭窄程度>70%的严重狭窄亚组中,CTA和MRA与AAR相比显著低估了狭窄程度(分别为P = 0.004和P = 0.007),而DSA显著高估了狭窄程度(P = 0.0007)。
这项体外模型研究表明,CTA和MRA低估了>70%的严重狭窄病变。DSA往往高估病情。DSA的准确性受斑块形态的影响,如山形病变。