Advertisement

Neuroradiology

, Volume 36, Issue 8, pp 602–604 | Cite as

CT angiography of the common carotid artery bifurcation: comparison between two techniques and conventional angiography

  • M. Castillo
  • J. D. Wilson
Diagnostic Neuroradiology

Abstract

We prospectively compared CT angiography (CTA) of the common carotid artery bifurcation using two different techniques with conventional angiography in patients with suspected stenoses of the internal carotid arteries in 20 symptomatic patients. Ten patients (Group 1) received 60 cc of contrast (medium 2 cc/sec) and CTA was acquired using 5 mm slices, reconstructed at 3 mm slice thickness. Ten patients (Group 2) received 90 cc of contrast (medium 3 cc/sec) and CTA was acquired using 3 mm slices reconstructed at 1 mm slice thickness. All CTA studies were postprocessed using maximum intensity projection algorithm. Stenoses were graded prospectively from CT angiograms and compared with selective conventional catheter angiograms. In Group 1, CTA overestimated the degree of narrowing in 9 of 10 stenoses proven by conventional angiograms. We interpreted 2 nearly occluded internal carotid arteries, 2 with moderate and marked stenoses, and 2 with no narrowings, but fibromuscular dysplasia on conventional angiograms as occluded on CTA, and 3 vessels as showing marked stenoses, not confirmed by angiography. CTA clearly depicted 1 mild stenosis, 4 normal bifurcations, and 6 occluded internal carotid arteries. In Group 2, CTA overestimated two stenoses; a correct diagnosis was made in 7 normal bifurcations, 3 mild, 2 moderate and 2 severe stenoses, 2 near occlusions, and 2 occlusions. Ulcerations were missed by CTA regardless of the technique utilized.

Key words

Angiography Computed tomography Atherosclerosis Carotid arteries 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kalender WA, Polacin A (1991) Physical performance characteristics of spiral CT scanning. Med Phys 18: 910–915Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rigauts H, Marchal G, Baert AL, Hupke R (1990) Spiral scanning and the influence of the reconstruction algorithm on image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr 14: 675–682Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schwartz RB, Jones KM, Chernoff DM, et al (1992) Common carotid artery bifurcation: evaluation with spiral CT. Radiology 185: 513–519Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Napel S, Marks MP, Rubin GD, et al (1992) CT angiography with spiral CT and maximum intensity projection. Radiology 185: 607–610Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marks MP, Napel S, Jordan JE, Enzmann DR (1993) Diagnosis of carotid artery disease: preliminary experience with maximum intensity projection spiral CT angiography. AJR 160: 1267–1271Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castillo M (1993) Diagnosis of disease of the common carotid artery bifurcation: CT angiography versus catheter angiography. AJR 161: 395–398Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Keller PJ, Drayer BP, Frm EK, et al (1989) MR angiography with two-dimensional acquisition and three-dimensional display. Radiology 173: 527–532Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    North american symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial collaborators (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 325: 445–453Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crawford DR, King K (1990) Computed tomography scanning with simultaneous patient translation. Med Phys 17: 967–982Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson CM, Saloner D, Tsuruda JS, Shapeero LG, Lee RE (1990) Artifacts in maximum-intensity-projection display of MR angiograms AJR 154: 623–629Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edelman RR (1992) MR angiography: present and future. AJR 161: 1–11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Castillo
    • 1
  • J. D. Wilson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations