Skip to main content
Log in

Three methods for accurate quantification of plaque volume in coronary arteries

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

Abstract

The coronary atherosclerotic process evolves to an occlusive disease that causes chronic angina and acute coronary syndromes, such as myocardial infarction and sudden death. An important milestone in the understanding of the atherosclerotic process is the development of tools for quantitative assessment of disease progression or regression. A new methodology to analyze the coronary vessel lumen and plaque morphology in 3-D is based on the fusion of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and biplane X-ray angiography, which results in a geometrically correct representation of coronary vessels. A comparison of three volume quantification methods: polytope, Watanabe, and Simpson's rule is reported for quantifying the amount of plaque accumulation. The three methods allow local estimation of plaque volume. To determine volumetric indices, the space between the luminal and adventitial surfaces is first subdivided and then each of the volume elements is considered individually to achieve volume quantification. Polyhedral volume elements are employed and the volume of every element is estimated by each of the three approaches. The volume quantification methods were validated in 314 computer-generated shapes. All three methods are highly accurate, providing a mean error of 0.138 ± 0.049%, 0.139 ± 0.049%, and 0.832 ± 0.203% for the polytope, Watanabe, and Simpson-rule methods, respectively. Nevertheless, the polytope and Watanabe methods are statistically significantly more accurate than the Simpson-rule approach (p < 0.001). The volumetric quantification methods were also tested using seven in vivo coronary arterial datasets from seven patients undergoing coronary angioplasty. While the polytope and Watanabe approaches are statistically significantly more accurate compared to the Simpson's rule method, accuracy of either of the tested method is sufficient for all practical purposes. Yet, the methods are not interchangeable and a single technique should be used in comparative volumetric studies.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Reiber JHC, Koning G, Dijkstra J, et al. Angiography and intravascular ultrasound. In: Sonka M, Fitzpatrick JM editors. Handbook of Medical Imaging - Volume 2: Medical Image Processing and Analysis. Bellingham WA: SPIE Press, 2000; 711–808.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brown BG, Simpson P, Dodge JT, Bolson EL, Dodge HT. Quantitative and qualitative coronary arteriography. In: Reiber JHC, Serruys PW editors. Quantitative Coronary Arteriography, Vol. 117 of Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991; 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Klein AK, Lee F, Amini A. Quantitative coronary angiography with deformable spline models. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1997; 16(5): 468–482.

    Google Scholar 

  4. de Feyter PJ, Serruys PW, Davies MJ, Richardson P, Lubsen J, Oliver MF. Quantitative coronary angiography to measure progression and regression of coronary atherosclerosis; value, limitations, and implications for clinical trials. Circulation 1991; 84(1): 412–423.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wahle A, Wellnhofer E, Mugaragu I, Sauer HU, Oswald H, Fleck E. Assessment of diffuse coronary artery disease by quantitative analysis of coronary morphology based upon 3–D reconstruction from biplane angiograms. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1995; 14(2): 230–241.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen SYJ, Metz CE. Improved determination of biplane imaging geometry from two projection images and its application to Three-dimensional reconstruction of coronary arterial trees'. Med Phys 1997; 24(5): 633–654.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pellot C, Herment A, Sigelle M, Horain P, Maître H, Peronneau P. A 3D reconstruction of vascular structures from two x-ray angiograms using an adapted simulated annealing algorithm. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1994; 13(1): 48–60.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bom N, Li W, van der Steen AFW, et al. Intracoronary ultrasound: technical update 1995. In: de Feyter PJ, Mario CD, Serruys PW editors. Quantitative coronary imaging. Rotterdam; Barjesteh/Meeuwes, 1995; 89–106.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang X, McKay C, Sonka M. Tissue characterization in intravascular ultrasound images. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1998; 17(6): 889–899.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Von Birgelen C, de Vrey EA, Mintz GS, et al. ECG-gated three-dimensional intravascular ultrasound feasibility and reproducibility of the automated analysis of coronary lumen and atherosclerotic plaque dimensions in humans. Circulation 1997; 96(9): 2944–2952.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Roelandt JRTC, Mario CD, Pandian NG, et al. Three-dimensional reconstruction of intracoronary ultrasound images; rationale, approaches, problems, and directions. Circulation 1994; 90(2), 1044–1055.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nakamura M, Yock P, Bonneau H, et al. Impact of peristent remodeling on restenosis a volumetric intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 2001; 103(17): 2130–2132.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schartl M, Bocksch W, Koschyk D, et al. Use of intravascular ultrasound to compare effects of different strategies of lipid-lowering therapy on plaque volume and composition in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 2001; 104(4): 387–392.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Laban M, Oomen JA, Slager CJ, et al. ANGUS: a new approach to three-dimensional reconstruction of coronary vessels by combined use of angiography and intravascular ultrasound. In: Proceedings of Computers in Cardiology 1995, Vienna AT. Piscataway NJ: IEEE Press, 1995; 325–328.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wahle A, Prause GPM, DeJong SC, Sonka M. Geometrically correct 3–D reconstruction of intravascular ultrasound images by fusion with biplane angiography - methods and validation'. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1999; 18(8): 686–699.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wahle A, Mitchell SC, Long RM, Sonka M. Accurate volumetric quantification of coronary lesions by fusion between intravascular ultrasound and biplane angiography. In: Proceedings of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Conference 2000; 549–554.

  17. Sheynin S, Tuzikov A. Formulae for polytope volume and surface moments'. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing, Vol. 3, 2001; 720–723.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Watanabe Y. A method for volume estimation by using vector areas and centroids of serial cross-sections. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1982; 29(3): 202–205.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Beier J, Joerke T, Lempert S, Wellnhofer E, Oswald H, Fleck E. A comparison of 7 different volumetry methods of left and right ventricle using post-mortem phantoms. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Computers in Cardiology, 1993; 33–36.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Medina, R., Wahle, A., Olszewski, M.E. et al. Three methods for accurate quantification of plaque volume in coronary arteries. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 19, 301–311 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025470327543

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025470327543

Navigation