Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of StentBoost subtract imaging on patient radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary intervention

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of StentBoost Subtract (SBS) imaging on patient radiation dose during percutaneous coronary intervention. Data were prospectively collected between February 2010 and November 2012 at a tertiary cardiac catheterization. All patients who had scheduled for coronary stent implantation performed by one expert interventional cardiologist with sufficient experience in SBS imaging and radiation protection, were included. The patients were divided into groups with or without SBS. A multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the impact of SBS imaging on patient radiation dose. Of 712 patients screened, 414 patients were enrolled in the study (with SBS: n = 177, without SBS: n = 237). Although the DAP, fluoroscopy time and cine frames used in the group with SBS were significantly increased when compared with those used in the group without SBS (P < 0.05), multiple linear regression shows SBS imaging has no significant impact on patient radiation dose (P > 0.05). Multivariate predictors of patient radiation dose were the patients’ BMI, B2/C lesions, number of stents placed and bifurcation stenting (P < 0.05). In selected patients, SBS imaging can be performed with comparable patient radiation dose, compared with plain fluoroscopic imaging. This may attribute to the operator’s sufficient experience in SBS imaging and radiation protection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Oemrawsingh PV, Mintz GS, Schalij MJ, Zwinderman AH, Jukema JW, van der Wall EE (2003) Intravascular ultrasound guidance improves angiographic and clinical outcome of stent implantation for long coronary artery stenoses: final results of a randomized comparison with angiographic guidance (TULIP Study). Circulation 107(1):62–67. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000043240.87526.3F

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cook S, Wenaweser P, Togni M, Billinger M, Morger C, Seiler C, Vogel R, Hess O, Meier B, Windecker S (2007) Incomplete stent apposition and very late stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. Circulation 115(18):2426–2434. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.658237

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Muraoka Y, Sonoda S, Tsuda Y, Tanaka S, Okazaki M, Otsuji Y (2011) Effect of intravascular ultrasound-guided adjuvant high-pressure non-compliant balloon post-dilation after drug-eluting stent implantation. Heart Vessels 26(6):565–571. doi:10.1007/s00380-010-0094-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Orford JL, Lerman A, Holmes DR (2004) Routine intravascular ultrasound guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention: a critical reappraisal. J Am Coll Cardiol 43(8):1335–1342. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2003.12.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Park KW, Kang SH, Yang HM, Lee HY, Kang HJ, Cho YS, Youn TJ, Koo BK, Chae IH, Kim HS (2012) Impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance in routine percutaneous coronary intervention for conventional lesions: data from the EXCELLENT trial. Int J Cardiol. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.03.059

    Google Scholar 

  6. Vydt T, Van Langenhove G (2006) Facilitated recognition of an undeployed stent with StentBoost. Int J Cardiol 112(3):397–398. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.07.077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Koolen JJ, van het Veer M, Hanekamp CE (2005) StentBoost image enhancement: first clinical experience. Medicamundi 49(2):4–8

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yang FF, Zhang LW, Huang DS, Shen D, Sun HY, Zhang CH, Wang YM, Zhang XW, Bai J, Ma YJ (2011) A novel angiographic technique, StentBoost, in comparison with intravascular ultrasound to assess stent expansion. Chin Med J (Engl) 124(6):939–942. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.2011.06.025

    Google Scholar 

  9. Tanaka N, Pijls NH, Koolen JJ, Botman KJ, Michels HR, Brueren BR, Peels K, Shindo N, Yamashita J, Yamashina A (2013) Assessment of optimum stent deployment by stent boost imaging: comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Heart Vessels 28(1):1–6. doi:10.1007/s00380-011-0202-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Davies AG, Conway D, Reid S, Cowen AR, Sivananthan M (2012) Assessment of coronary stent deployment using computer enhanced x-ray images-validation against intravascular ultrasound and best practice recommendations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. doi:10.1002/ccd.23366

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Agostoni P, Verheye S (2007) Bifurcation stenting with a dedicated biolimus-eluting stent: X-ray visual enhancement of the final angiographic result with “StentBoost Subtract”. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 70(2):233–236. doi:10.1002/ccd.21096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Agostoni P, Verheye S (2009) Novel self-expanding stent system for enhanced provisional bifurcation stenting: examination by StentBoost and intravascular ultrasound. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 73(4):481–487. doi:10.1002/ccd.21878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eng MH, Klein AP, Wink O, Hansgen A, Carroll JD, Garcia JA (2010) Enhanced stent visualization: a case series demonstrating practical applications during PCI. Int J Cardiol 141(1):e8–e16. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.11.13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zontar D, Kuhelj D, Skrk D, Zdesar U (2010) Patient peak skin doses from cardiac interventional procedures. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 139(1–3):262–265. doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Stratis AI, Anthopoulos PL, Gavaliatsis IP, Ifantis GP, Salahas AI, Antonellis IP, Tavernarakis AG, Molfetas MI (2009) Patient dose in cardiac radiology. Hellenic J Cardiol 50(1):17–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mishell JM, Vakharia KT, Ports TA, Yeghiazarians Y, Michaels AD (2007) Determination of adequate coronary stent expansion using StentBoost, a novel fluoroscopic image processing technique. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 69(1):84–93. doi:10.1002/ccd.20901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Agostoni P, Verheye S (2009) Step-by-step StentBoost-guided small vessel stenting using the self-expandable Sparrow stent-in-wire. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 73(1):78–83. doi:10.1002/ccd.21817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tsigkas G, Moulias A, Alexopoulos D (2011) The StentBoost imaging enhancement technique as guidance for optimal deployment of adjacent-sequential stents. J Invasive Cardiol 23(10):427–429

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Oh DJ, Choi CU, Kim S, Im SI, Na JO, Lim HE, Kim JW, Kim EJ, Han SW, Rha SW, Park CG, Seo HS (2013) Effect of StentBoost imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention on mid-term angiographic and clinical outcomes. Int J Cardiol. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.12.051

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kuon E, Glaser C, Dahm JB (2003) Effective techniques for reduction of radiation dosage to patients undergoing invasive cardiac procedures. Br J Radiol 76(906):406–413. doi:10.1259/bjr/82051842

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Miller DL, Vano E, Bartal G, Balter S, Dixon R, Padovani R, Schueler B, Cardella JF, de Baere T, Cardiovscular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe; Society of Interventional Radiology (2010) Occupational radiation protection in interventional radiology: a joint guideline of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe and the Society of Interventional Radiology. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33(2):230–239. doi:10.1007/s00270-009-9756-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chida K, Kagaya Y, Saito H, Ishibashi T, Takahashi S, Zuguchi M (2009) Evaluation of patient radiation dose during cardiac interventional procedures: what is the most effective method? Acta Radiol 50(5):474–481. doi:10.1080/02841850902852752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Martin CJ, Farquhar B, Stockdale E, MacDonald S (1994) A study of the relationship between patient dose and size in paediatric radiology. Br J Radiol 67(801):864–871. doi:10.1259/0007-1285-67-801-864

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fetterly KA, Lennon RJ, Bell MR, Holmes DR Jr, Rihal CS (2011) Clinical determinants of radiation dose in percutaneous coronary interventional procedures: influence of patient size, procedure complexity, and performing physician. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 4(3):336–343. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2010.10.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tsapaki V, Maniatis PN, Magginas A, Voudris V, Patsilinakos S, Vranzta T, Vano E, Cokkinos DS (2008) What are the clinical and technical factors that influence the kerma-area product in percutaneous coronary intervention? Br J Radiol 81(972):940–945. doi:10.1259/bjr/30604628

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsapaki V, Magginas A, Vano E, Kottou S, Papadakis E, Dafnomili P, Kyrozi E, Kollaros N, Neofotistou V, Cokkinos D (2006) Factors that influence radiation dose in percutaneous coronary intervention. J Interv Cardiol 19(3):237–244. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8183.2006.00137.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kuipers G, Delewi R, Velders XL, Vis MM, van der Schaaf RJ, Koch KT, Henriques JP, de Winter RJ, Baan J Jr, Tijssen JG, Piek JJ (2012) Radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary angiograms performed by the radial compared with the femoral route. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 5(7):752–757. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.03.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Georges JL, Livarek B, Gibault-Genty G, Aziza JP, Hautecoeur JL, Soleille H, Messaoudi H, Annabi N, Kebsi MA (2009) Reduction of radiation delivered to patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures. Effect of a programme for dose reduction based on radiation-protection training. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 102(12):821–827. doi:10.1016/j.acvd.2009.09.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors indicate no potential conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, General Hospital of Chinese People’s Armed Police Forces, No. 69, Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100039, China

    Zhigeng Jin, Shengli Yang, Limin Jing & Huiliang Liu

Authors
  1. Zhigeng Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shengli Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Limin Jing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huiliang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huiliang Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jin, Z., Yang, S., Jing, L. et al. Impact of StentBoost subtract imaging on patient radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary intervention. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29, 1207–1213 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0200-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0200-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation