Shammas Nicolas W, Shammas Gail A, Jones-Miller Sue, Radaideh Qais, Winter Allyson R, Shammas Andrew N, Kovach Istvan Z, Bou Dargham Bassel, Daher Ghassan E, Rachwan Rayan Jo, Shammas W John, Omar Waleed, Manazir Aman, Kasula Srikanth
Midwest Cardiovascular Research Foundation, 1622 E. Lombard Street, Davenport, IA 52803 USA.
J Invasive Cardiol. 2018 Dec;30(12):452-455.
Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is considered the gold standard in diagnosing common iliac vein (CIV) compression. The presence of >50% surface area reduction by IVUS is considered significant compression by most operators. Thus, we evaluated the role of computed tomography angiography (CTA) and venography in diagnosing CIV compression when compared to IVUS.
All patients who underwent CTA of the pelvis with venous filling phase, IVUS, and venography within a few weeks apart to evaluate for symptomatic CIV compression from one cardiovascular practice were retrospectively reviewed. Quantitative vascular analysis was performed on all images obtained to determine (1) percent stenosis (PS) by venogram; and (2) minimal lumen area (MLA) and PS by CTA and IVUS at the compression site (using ipsilateral distal CIV as reference area). Spearman's rank correlation, paired t-tests, or signed rank tests were performed as appropriate to compare between values of MLA and PS among the three different imaging modalities.
A total of 96 patients were included (62.5% females; mean age, 62.3 ± 14.8 years). A significant correlation was found between MLA-CTA and MLA-IVUS (Spearman's rho, 0.27; P=.01) and PS-CTA and PS-IVUS (Spearman's rho, 0.327; P<.01). A significant correlation was also found between PS-venogram and PS-IVUS (Spearman's rho, 0.471; P<.001). MLA-CTA and MLA-IVUS had a median difference of +41 mm² (95% CI, 25.0-57.5; P<.001) whereas PS-CTA and PS-IVUS were not statistically different (median difference, -5.6 mm²; 95% CI, -12.2 to 0.7). Furthermore, PS-IVUS and PS-venogram had a median difference of +15.2% (95% CI, 10.4-20.1; P<.001).
PS-venogram correlates with PS-IVUS, but venogram underestimates the PS by an average of 15.2%. In contrast, PS-CTA and PS-IVUS are not statistically different despite an over-estimation of MLA by CTA when compared to IVUS. Therefore, we conclude that PS-CTA and not PS-venogram can be used to predict PS on IVUS.
血管内超声(IVUS)被认为是诊断髂总静脉(CIV)受压的金标准。大多数操作者认为,IVUS显示表面积减少>50%即为显著受压。因此,我们评估了计算机断层血管造影(CTA)和静脉造影在与IVUS对比诊断CIV受压时的作用。
回顾性分析了来自一家心血管科的所有患者,这些患者在几周内先后接受了盆腔静脉充盈期CTA、IVUS和静脉造影,以评估有症状的CIV受压情况。对所有获得的图像进行定量血管分析,以确定(1)静脉造影的狭窄百分比(PS);以及(2)CTA和IVUS在受压部位的最小管腔面积(MLA)和PS(使用同侧远端CIV作为参考区域)。根据情况进行Spearman等级相关性分析、配对t检验或符号秩检验,以比较三种不同成像方式下MLA和PS值之间的差异。
共纳入96例患者(62.5%为女性;平均年龄62.3±14.8岁)。MLA-CTA与MLA-IVUS之间存在显著相关性(Spearman相关系数ρ=0.27;P=0.01),PS-CTA与PS-IVUS之间也存在显著相关性(Spearman相关系数ρ=0.327;P<0.01)。PS-静脉造影与PS-IVUS之间也存在显著相关性(Spearman相关系数ρ=0.471;P<0.001)。MLA-CTA与MLA-IVUS的中位数差异为+41mm²(95%CI,25.0-57.5;P<0.001),而PS-CTA与PS-IVUS无统计学差异(中位数差异为-5.6mm²;95%CI,-12.2至0.7)。此外,PS-IVUS与PS-静脉造影的中位数差异为+15.2%(95%CI,10.4-20.1;P<0.001)。
PS-静脉造影与PS-IVUS相关,但静脉造影平均低估PS 15.2%。相比之下,尽管CTA与IVUS相比高估了MLA,但PS-CTA与PS-IVUS无统计学差异。因此,我们得出结论,PS-CTA而非PS-静脉造影可用于预测IVUS上的PS。