Department for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Jena, Germany.
Center for Clinical Studies, University Hospital Jena, Germany.
Eur J Radiol. 2021 Feb;135:109476. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109476. Epub 2020 Dec 27.
To evaluate the image quality and the safety of automated carbon dioxide (CO) digital subtraction angiography (DSA).
Fifty patients receiving DSA for femoropopliteal peripheral arterial disease (PAD) were enrolled in this single-center prospective study. All patients received iodinated contrast media (ICM) and CO as a contrast agent in the same target lesion. As a primary endpoint, four raters independently evaluated the angiography images based on overall image quality, visibility of collaterals, and assessment of stenoses/occlusions. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and differences between the raters were evaluated using Friedmann's test. Secondary endpoints were procedure safety and patient pain assessment.
Inter-rater agreement between CO-DSA and ICM-DSA images was fair to excellent for overall image quality (ICC: 0.399-0.748), fair to excellent for the visibility of collaterals (ICC: 0.513-0.691), and poor to excellent for the assessment of stenoses/occlusions (ICC: -0.065-0.762). There were no significant differences between the raters. Two patients had a hematoma, one reported pain related to puncture, one became nauseous, and one vomited. No other adverse events were observed. Reported pain scores were significantly higher for CO-DSA vs. ICM-DSA (1.25 vs. 0625; p < 0.028).
CO2-DSA using automated injection system in combination with proprietary post-processing software is safe and comparable diagnostic test compared to ICM-DSA.
评估自动化二氧化碳(CO)数字减影血管造影(DSA)的图像质量和安全性。
本单中心前瞻性研究纳入了 50 名因股腘周围动脉疾病(PAD)而行 DSA 的患者。所有患者均在同一目标病变部位接受碘造影剂(ICM)和 CO 作为造影剂。主要终点是 4 名评估者根据整体图像质量、侧支显影和狭窄/闭塞评估对血管造影图像进行独立评估。采用组内相关系数(ICC)评估评估者间的一致性,采用 Friedman 检验评估评估者间的差异。次要终点是程序安全性和患者疼痛评估。
CO-DSA 和 ICM-DSA 图像的总体图像质量(ICC:0.399-0.748)、侧支显影(ICC:0.513-0.691)和狭窄/闭塞评估(ICC:-0.065-0.762)的评估者间一致性为良好至优秀。评估者之间没有显著差异。2 名患者出现血肿,1 名患者报告与穿刺相关的疼痛,1 名患者感到恶心,1 名患者呕吐。未观察到其他不良事件。与 ICM-DSA 相比,CO-DSA 的报告疼痛评分明显更高(1.25 比 0.625;p<0.028)。
与 ICM-DSA 相比,使用自动注射系统结合专有后处理软件的 CO2-DSA 是一种安全且具有可比性的诊断性检查。