Morphologic and physiologic validation of quantitative coronary arteriography utilizing digital methods

  • G. B. John Mancini
Part of the Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine book series (DICM, volume 87)

Summary

To assess the in-vivo performance of a coronary quantitation program, 16 dogs were instrumented with precision-drilled, plastic cylinders to create intraluminal stenoses ranging from 0.83 mm to 1.83 mm. Biplane, on-line digital coronary angiograms and cineangiograms were obtained. The on-line digital images were analyzed in nonsubtracted and subtracted modes. Cineangiograms were digitized and quantitated by the same computer program. There was an excellent correlation between known and measured minimal diameter stenoses (r = 0.87−0.98, s.e.e. = 0.09−0.24 mm). Inter- and intraobserver variability analysis showed high reproducibility (r = 0.90−0.97, s.e.e. = 0.12−0.23 mm). The best results in both analyses were achieved by nonsubtracted digital imaging and the worst by cineradiography. Measures of percent diameter stenosis, percent area stenosis (geometric and videometric) and absolute minimal cross-sectional area (geometric and videometric) were all highly correlated with independent measures of actual coronary flow reserve. This study provides a direct, in-vivo, anatomical and physiological validation of a new and rapid coronary quantitation method suitable for analysis of both digital angiograms and cineangiograms.

Keywords

Coronary Flow Reserve Reactive Hyperemia Angiographic Catheter Percent Diameter Stenosis Geometric Diameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brown BG, Bolson EL, Dodge HT: Quantitative computer techniques for analyzing coronary arteriograms. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 28: 403–418, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reiber JHC, Kooijman CJ, Slager CJ, Gerbrands JJ, Schuurbiers JCH, Boer A den, Wijns W, Serruys PW: Computer assisted analysis of the severity of obstructions from coronary cineangiograms: A methodological review. Automedica 5: 219–238, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    LeFree MT, Simon SB, Mancini GBJ, Vogel RA: Digital radiographic assessment of coronary arterial geometric diameter and videodensitometric cross-sectional area. Proc SPIE 626: 334–341, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    LeFree MT, Mulvaney JA, Vogel RA: Image corrections for digital radiographic geometric and videodensitometric distortions. Radiology 157P: 36, 1985 (Abstract)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Neter J, Wasserman W: Applied linear statistical models, Irwin RD, Inc., Homewood, Illinois, 1974, pp 702–703.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Snedecor GW, Cochran WG: Statistical Methods, The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1972, pp 185–186.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown BG, Bolson E, Frimer M, Dodge HT: Quantitative coronary arteriography: Estimation of dimensions, hemodynamic resistance, and atheroma mass of coronary artery lesions using the arteriogram and digital computation. Circulation 55: 329–337, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kishon Y, Yerushalmi S, Deutsch V, Neufeld HN, Koprak A: Measurement of coronary arterial lumen by densitometric analysis of angiograms. Angiology 30: 304–312, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sandor T, Als AV, Paulin S: Cine-densitometric measurement of coronary arterial stenoses. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 5: 229–245, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Spears JR: Rotating step-wedge technique for extraction of luminal cross-sectional area information from single plane coronary cineangiograms. Acta Radiol Diagn 22: 217–225, 1981.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kruger RA: Estimation of the diameter of an iodine concentration within blood vessels using digital radiography devices. Med Phys 8: 652–658, 1981.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Spears JR, Sandor T, Als AV, Malagold M, Markis JE, Grossman W, Serur JR, Paulin S: Computerized image analysis for quantitative measurement of vessel diameter from cineangiograms. Circulation 68: 453–461, 1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jaques P, DiBianca F, Pizer S, Kohout F, Lifshitz L, Delany D: Quantitative digital fluorography. Computer vs. human estimation of vascular stenoses. Invest Radiol 20: 4552, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nichols AB, Gabrieli CFO, Fenoglio Jr JJ, Esser PD: Quantification of relative coronary arterial stenosis by cinevideodensitometric analysis of coronary arteriograms. Circulation 69: 512–522, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wright GA, Taylor KW, Rowlands JA: Noise in stenosis measurement using digital subtraction angiography. Med Phys 12: 705–712, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Simons MA, Kruger RA: Vessel diameter measurement using digital subtraction radiography. Invest Radiol 20: 510–516, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reiber JHC, Kooijman CJ, Boer A den, Serruys PW: Assessment of dimensions and image quality of coronary contrast catheters from cineangiograms. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 11: 521–531, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kirkeeide RL, Fung P, Smalling RW, Gould KL: Automated evaluation of vessel diameter from arteriograms. Comput Cardiol: 215–218, 1982.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tobis J, Nalcioglu O, Iseri L, Johnston WD, Roeck W, Castleman E, Bauer B, Montelli S, Henry WL: Detection and quantitation of coronary artery stenoses from digital subtraction angiograms compared with 35-millimeter film cineangiograms. Am J Cardiol 54: 489–496, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vas R, Eigler N, Miyazono C, Pfaff JM, Resser KJ, Wiess M, Nivatpumin T, Whiting J, Forrester J: Digital quantification eliminates intraobserver and interobserver variability in the evaluation of coronary artery stenosis. Am J Cardiol 56: 718–723, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bray BE, Anderson FL, Hardin CW, Kruger RA, Sutton RB, Nelson JA: Digital subtraction coronary angiography using high-pass temporal filtration: A comparison with cineangiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 11: 17–24, 1985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mistretta CA: X-ray image intensifiers. In: Haus AG, (ed): The physics of medical imaging: recording system measurements and techniques. American Institute of Physics, New York 1979, pp 182–205.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harrison DG, White CW, Hiratzka LF, Doty DB, Barnes DH, Eastham CL, Marcus ML: The value of lesion cross-sectional area determined by quantitative coronary angiography in assessing the physiologic significance of proximal left anterior descending coronary arterial stenoses. Circulation 69: 1111–1119, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Legrand V, Mancini GBJ, Bates ER, Hodgson JMcB, Gross MD, Vogel RA: Comparative study of coronary flow reserve, coronary anatomy and the results of radionuclide exercise tests in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 8: 1022–1032, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harrison DG, Ferguson DW, Collins SM, Skorton DJ, Ericksen EE, Kioschos JM, Marcus ML, White CW: Rethrombosis after reperfusion with streptokinase: importance of geometry of residual lesions. Circulation 69: 991–999, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Serruys PW, Reiber JI-IC, Wijns W, Brand M vd, Kooijman CJ, Katen H ten, Hugenholtz PG: Assessment of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by quantitative coronary angiography: diameter versus densitometric area measurements. Am J Cardiol 54: 482–488, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wilson RF, Holida MD, White CW: Quantitative angiographic morphology of coronary stenoses leading to myocardial infarction or unstable angina. Circulation 73: 286–293, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson MR, Brayden GP, Ericksen EE, Collins SM, Skorton DJ, Harrison DG, Marcus ML, White CW: Changes in cross-sectional area of the coronary lumen in the six months after angioplasty: a quantitative analysis of the variable response to percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Circulation 73: 467–475, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brown BG, Gallery CA, Badger RS, Kennedy JW, Mathey D, Bolson EL, Dodge HT: Incomplete lysis of thrombus in the moderate underlying atherosclerotic lesion during intracoronary infusion of streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction: quantitative angiographie observations. Circulation 73: 653–661, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. B. John Mancini

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations