Marks M P, Napel S, Jordan J E, Enzmann D R
Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, CA 94305-5105.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993 Jun;160(6):1267-71. doi: 10.2214/ajr.160.6.8498231.
Spiral CT allows continuous data to be acquired rapidly, and if a correctly timed IV bolus of contrast material is given, spiral CT angiography can be performed. This study was designed to evaluate spiral CT angiography with maximum-intensity-projection reconstructions for assessing the degree of carotid artery stenosis.
Spiral CT angiography (of 28 carotid bifurcations in 14 patients) was compared in a blinded fashion with conventional angiography (of 28 bifurcations) and with two-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography (of 12 bifurcations) to assess degree of stenosis. A nonblinded comparison of the contour of the lumen at the site of stenosis was then made between conventional angiography, spiral CT angiography, and MR angiography. The degree of stenosis was measured in each internal carotid artery and categorized as mild (< 30%), moderate (30-69%), or severe (70-99%) stenosis or as occlusion. Maximum-intensity-projection images were used for the evaluations; however, if calcification was circumferential and the lumen of the carotid artery could not be analyzed in the area of the calcification, the axial source images were used.
The results of CT angiography and conventional angiography agreed overall in 25 (89%) of 28 cases (r = .921, p = .05, Spearman rank correlation). The presence of severe stenosis or occlusion was correctly identified in seven of seven cases. In the moderate and mild stenosis categories, 18 (86%) of 21 were correctly identified (r = .802, p = .122). Three internal carotid arteries (11%) had circumferential calcification that necessitated evaluation of the axial source images, and the measurements obtained from the axial images agreed well with angiographic findings. MR angiography correlated well with the various categories of stenosis. However, when we compared MR angiography directly with CT angiography and conventional angiography, we found that the degree of stenosis was overestimated when MR angiography was used.
Our results show that spiral CT angiography shows normal and abnormal carotid anatomy well when compared with conventional angiography. The short examination time and clear depiction of arterial caliber in areas of stenosis are significant advantages of spiral CT angiography compared with MR angiography.
螺旋CT能够快速采集连续数据,若静脉团注对比剂的时机正确,即可进行螺旋CT血管造影。本研究旨在评估采用最大密度投影重建技术的螺旋CT血管造影对颈动脉狭窄程度的评估价值。
以盲法比较螺旋CT血管造影(对14例患者的28个颈动脉分叉进行检查)、传统血管造影(对28个分叉进行检查)以及二维时间飞跃磁共振血管造影(对12个分叉进行检查)对狭窄程度的评估情况。随后对传统血管造影、螺旋CT血管造影和磁共振血管造影在狭窄部位的管腔轮廓进行非盲法比较。测量每条颈内动脉的狭窄程度,并将其分为轻度(<30%)、中度(30% - 69%)或重度(70% - 99%)狭窄或闭塞。评估采用最大密度投影图像;然而,若钙化呈环形且在钙化区域无法分析颈动脉管腔,则使用轴位源图像。
28例中25例(89%)的CT血管造影结果与传统血管造影总体一致(r = 0.921,p = 0.05,Spearman等级相关)。7例重度狭窄或闭塞病例中,有7例被正确识别。在中度和轻度狭窄类别中,21例中有18例(86%)被正确识别(r = 0.802,p = 0.122)。3条颈内动脉(11%)有环形钙化,需要评估轴位源图像,从轴位图像获得的测量结果与血管造影结果吻合良好。磁共振血管造影与各类狭窄情况相关性良好。然而,当我们将磁共振血管造影与CT血管造影和传统血管造影直接比较时,发现使用磁共振血管造影时狭窄程度被高估。
我们的结果表明,与传统血管造影相比,螺旋CT血管造影能很好地显示正常及异常的颈动脉解剖结构。与磁共振血管造影相比,螺旋CT血管造影检查时间短且能清晰显示狭窄区域的动脉管径,具有显著优势。