首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endovascular therapy: an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists >CT angiography of stented carotid arteries: comparison with Doppler ultrasonography.
【24h】

CT angiography of stented carotid arteries: comparison with Doppler ultrasonography.

机译:颈动脉支架的CT血管造影:与多普勒超声检查的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

PURPOSE: To determine whether computed tomographic angiography (CTA) is a feasible modality for assessing stented carotid arteries and whether in-stent restenosis based on CTA concurs with ultrasonography (US). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 37 follow-up CTA and US images from 27 patients (23 men; median age 70 years, range 56-77) who received 34 nitinol carotid stents. CTA and US images were compared with respect to assessability and percent stenosis. Both visual estimation (>or=50% or not) and the NASCET method were used to determine percent stenosis in CTA images. For US, a determination of >or=50% stenosis was based on peak systolic velocity (>or=200 cm/s) and an internal carotid artery to common carotid artery ratio >or=2.5. Percent stenosis values by CTA were also compared to values (n=7, 21%) determined by catheter angiography. RESULTS: CTA and US images were "totally assessable" in 27 (73%) and 15 (41%), "totally non-assessable" in 0 (0%) and 3 (8%), and "partially assessable"in 10 (27%) and 19 (51%), respectively. Assessability of CTA images was equal to or better than that of US images in 33 (89%). The percent stenoses by CTA and US were comparable in 20 cases. CTA found >or=50% stenosis using the NASCET method in 4 of 20 stents; none of these showed >or=50% stenosis by visual estimation of CTA or by spectral Doppler US. Compared with catheter angiography, CTA overestimated percent stenosis from 34% to 66% (mean 53%). US confirmed 2 angiographically proven restenoses, but CTA identified only 1. CONCLUSION: CTA provides better image quality for stented carotid arteries than US, but it might be inferior to US in determining restenosis in assessable cases. Therefore, CTA is likely to be an alternative to US in cases of non-assessability. A large-scale study including more restenosis cases is warranted to reveal which modality is more reliable for diagnosis of restenosis.
机译:目的:确定计算机断层血管造影(CTA)是否是评估颈动脉支架血管的可行方式,以及基于CTA的支架内再狭窄是否与超声检查(美国)相一致。方法:回顾性分析了37例CTA和US图像,来自27例患者(23名男性;中位年龄70岁,范围56-77),接受了34例镍钛合金颈动脉支架。比较了CTA和US图像的可评估性和狭窄百分比。视觉估计(≥50%与否)和NASCET方法都用于确定CTA图像中的狭窄百分比。对于US,基于峰值收缩速度(> or = 200 cm / s)和颈内动脉与颈总动脉之比> or = 2.5,确定狭窄≥50%。还比较了通过CTA测得的狭窄百分比值与通过导管血管造影确定的值(n = 7,21%)。结果:CTA和US图像在27个(73%)和15个(41%)中是“完全可评估”的,在0(0%)和3(8%)中是“完全不可评估”的,在10个中是“部分可评估的” (27%)和19(51%)。在33个国家(占89%)中,CTA图像的可评估性等于或优于美国图像。 CTA和US的狭窄率在20例中相当。使用NASCET方法,在20个支架中的4个中,CTA发现狭窄率≥50%。通过目测估算CTA或通过频谱多普勒超声,这些都没有显示出≥50%的狭窄。与导管血管造影术相比,CTA将狭窄百分比从34%高估到66%(平均53%)。美国证实了2个经血管造影证实的再狭窄,但CTA仅发现了1个。结论:CTA为支架颈动脉提供的图像质量比美国好,但在可评估病例中确定再狭窄方面可能不及美国。因此,在不可评估的情况下,CTA可能会替代美国。有必要进行一项包括更多再狭窄病例的大规模研究,以揭示哪种方法对再狭窄的诊断更为可靠。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号