Leclerc X, Godefroy O, Pruvo J P, Leys D
Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Lille, France.
Stroke. 1995 Sep;26(9):1577-81. doi: 10.1161/01.str.26.9.1577.
No previous study has compared the reliability of carotid artery measurement provided by axial images, shaded surface display (SSD), and maximum intensity projection (MIP).
Helical CT and conventional angiography were performed prospectively in 20 patients with atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery. Stenosis measurement was performed in a blinded fashion on angiography and CT by two independent examiners. Calcifications were segmented when they were located far enough from the vascular lumen. SSD and MIP were systematically performed for each carotid bifurcation. We measured stenosis using conventional angiography as standard and the different CT reconstructions (axial images, SSD, and MIP) by comparing the stenosis diameter at its narrowest point to the normal internal carotid artery. The degree of stenosis was classified into six groups: no stenosis, mild stenosis (< 30%), moderate stenosis (30% to 70%), severe stenosis (> 70%), near occlusion, and occlusion (100%). No measurement was made in cases of normal artery, near occlusion, and occlusion.
Correlations between angiography and the three types of reconstruction were very good. Axial sections correctly classified the carotid arteries in 95% of cases. In 10 carotid arteries, stenosis was not assessable by SSD and MIP because of calcifications. In the remaining carotid arteries, MIP correctly classified the degree of stenosis in 96% of cases, whereas SSD misclassified 21% of cases.
Our study showed that axial images provide a reliable evaluation of carotid artery stenosis. Calcifications are limiting factors in SSD or MIP. When atherosclerotic plaques are not calcified, MIP reconstructions provide a more reliable measurement of the vascular lumen than SSD.
既往尚无研究比较轴向图像、表面阴影显示(SSD)及最大密度投影(MIP)测量颈动脉的可靠性。
对20例颈内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者前瞻性地进行螺旋CT及传统血管造影检查。由两名独立的检查者以盲法对血管造影和CT图像进行狭窄测量。当钙化灶距血管腔足够远时对其进行分割。对每个颈动脉分叉处系统地进行SSD和MIP重建。我们以传统血管造影为标准测量狭窄程度,并通过比较狭窄最窄处直径与正常颈内动脉直径来评估不同CT重建方式(轴向图像、SSD和MIP)。狭窄程度分为六组:无狭窄、轻度狭窄(<30%)、中度狭窄(30%至70%)、重度狭窄(>70%)、接近闭塞及闭塞(100%)。正常动脉、接近闭塞及闭塞的情况不进行测量。
血管造影与三种重建方式之间的相关性非常好。轴向断面在95%的病例中正确分类了颈动脉。在10条颈动脉中,由于钙化,SSD和MIP无法评估狭窄情况。在其余颈动脉中,MIP在96%的病例中正确分类了狭窄程度,而SSD在21%的病例中分类错误。
我们的研究表明轴向图像能可靠地评估颈动脉狭窄。钙化是SSD或MIP的限制因素。当动脉粥样硬化斑块无钙化时,MIP重建比SSD能更可靠地测量血管腔。