Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 25, Issue 10, pp 2937–2944 | Cite as

Validation of a method to differentiate arterial and venous vessels in CT perfusion data using linear combinations of quantitative time-density curve characteristics

  • Lukas Havla
  • Moritz Schneider
  • Kolja M. Thierfelder
  • Sebastian E. Beyer
  • Birgit Ertl-Wagner
  • Wieland H. Sommer
  • Olaf Dietrich
Computed Tomography

Abstract

Objectives

We aimed to develop and evaluate a new method that reliably differentiates between cerebral arteries and veins using voxel-wise CT-perfusion-derived parameters.

Materials and Methods

Fourteen consecutive patients with suspected stroke but without pathological findings were examined on a multi-detector CT system: 32 dynamic phases (∆t = 1.5 s) during application of 35 mL iomeprol-350 were acquired at 80 kV/200mAs. Three hemodynamic parameters were calculated for 18 arterial and venous vessel segments: A (maximum of the time-density-curve), T (time-to-peak), and W (full-width-at-half-maximum). Using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and Fisher’s linear discriminant analysis (FLDA), the performance of every classifier (A, T, W) and of all linear combinations for the differentiation of arterial and venous vessels was determined.

Results

A maximum area under the ROC-curve (AUC) of 0.945 (accuracy = 86.8 %) was obtained using the FLDA combination of A&T or the triplet FLDA of A&T&W for the classification of venous and arterial vessels. The best single parameter was T with an AUC of 0.871 (accuracy = 79.0 %), which performed significantly worse than the combination A&T (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Arteries and veins can be accurately differentiated based on dynamic CT perfusion data using the maximum of the time-density curve, its time-to-peak, its width, and FLDA combinations of these parameters, which yield accuracies up to 87 %.

Key points

• For classification of cerebral vasculature, time-to-peak has the best single-parameter accuracy.

• Fisher’s linear discriminant analysis improves the performance of the individual classifiers.

• Combining signal maximum and time-to-peak parameters significantly increased the classifying potential.

• Pre-processing of time-density-curves by Gaussian filtering or fitting can improve diagnostic accuracy.

Keywords

X-ray computed tomography Diagnostic imaging Angiography Discriminant analysis Brain 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Olaf Dietrich. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Methodology: retrospective, experimental, performed at one institution.

References

  1. 1.
    Menon BK, Smith EE, Modi J et al (2011) Regional leptomeningeal score on CT angiography predicts clinical and imaging outcomes in patients with acute anterior circulation occlusions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:1640–1645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Klingebiel R, Zimmer C, Rogalla P et al (2001) Assessment of the arteriovenous cerebrovascular system by multi-slice CT. A single-bolus, monophasic protocol. Acta Radiol 42:560–562PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Casey SO, Alberico RA, Patel M et al (1996) Cerebral CT venography. Radiology 198:163–170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Prokop M (2000) Multislice CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 36:86–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calleja AI, Cortijo E, García-Bermejo P et al (2013) Collateral circulation on perfusion-computed tomography-source images predicts the response to stroke intravenous thrombolysis. Eur J Neurol 20:795–802CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smit EJ, Vonken E, van Seeters T et al (2013) Timing-invariant imaging of collateral vessels in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 44:2194–2199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frölich AMJ, Wolff SL, Psychogios MN et al (2014) Time-resolved assessment of collateral flow using 4D CT angiography in large-vessel occlusion stroke. Eur Radiol 24:390–396CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wintermark M, Flanders AE, Velthuis B et al (2006) Perfusion-CT assessment of infarct core and penumbra: Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in 130 patients suspected of acute hemispheric stroke. Stroke 37:979–985CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wintermark M, Sesay M, Barbier E et al (2005) Comparative overview of brain perfusion imaging techniques. Stroke 36:2032–2033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smit EJ, Vonken E, van der Schaaf IC et al (2012) Timing-invariant reconstruction for deriving high-quality CT angiographic data from cerebral CT perfusion data. Radiology 263:216–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Beier J, Büge T, Stroszczynski C et al (1998) 2D and 3D parameter images for the analysis of contrast medium distribution in dynamic CT and MRI. Radiologe 38:832–840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mendrik A, Vonken E-J, van Ginneken B et al (2010) Automatic segmentation of intracranial arteries and veins in four-dimensional cerebral CT perfusion scans. Med Phys 37:2956–2966CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Struffert T, Ott S, Kowarschik M et al (2013) Measurement of quantifiable parameters by time-density curves in the elastase-induced aneurysm model: first results in the comparison of a flow diverter and a conventional aneurysm stent. Eur Radiol 23:521–527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K et al (2010) elastix: a toolbox for intensity-based medical image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29:196–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sourbron S, Biffar AF, Ingrisch M, et al. (2009) PMI0.4: platform for research in medical imaging. Proc. ESMRMB, AntalyaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R Core Team (2014) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A et al (2011) pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 12:77PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bonferroni C (1936) Teoria statistica delle classi e calcolo delle probabilita. Pubbl del R Ist Super di Sci Econ e Commer di Firenze 8:3–62Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fisher RA (1936) The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann Eugen 7:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Biffar A, Baur-Melnyk A, Schmidt GP et al (2010) Multiparameter MRI assessment of normal-appearing and diseased vertebral bone marrow. Eur Radiol 20:2679–2689CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schneider MJ, Cyran CC, Nikolaou K et al (2014) Monitoring early response to anti-angiogenic therapy: diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and volume measurements in colon carcinoma xenografts. PLoS One 9:e106970PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gentleman RC, Carey VJ, Bates DM et al (2004) Bioconductor: open software development for computational biology and bioinformatics. Genome Biol 5:R80PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Slawski M, Boulesteix A-L, Bernau C (2009) CMA: Synthesis of microarray-based classificationGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tan JC, Dillon WP, Liu S et al (2007) Systematic comparison of perfusion-CT and CT-angiography in acute stroke patients. Ann Neurol 61:533–543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Miteff F, Levi CR, Bateman GA et al (2009) The independent predictive utility of computed tomography angiographic collateral status in acute ischaemic stroke. Brain 132:2231–2238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lukas Havla
    • 1
  • Moritz Schneider
    • 1
  • Kolja M. Thierfelder
    • 2
  • Sebastian E. Beyer
    • 2
  • Birgit Ertl-Wagner
    • 2
  • Wieland H. Sommer
    • 2
  • Olaf Dietrich
    • 1
  1. 1.Josef Lissner Laboratory for Biomedical Imaging, Institute for Clinical RadiologyLudwig-Maximilians-University Hospital MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Clinical RadiologyLudwig-Maximilians-University Hospital MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations