Limits...
Assessment of three dimensional quantitative coronary analysis by using rotational angiography for measurement of vessel length and diameter.

Lee JB, Chang SG, Kim SY, Lee YS, Ryu JK, Choi JY, Kim KS, Park JS - Int J Cardiovasc Imaging (2011)

Bottom Line: The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel's lumen diameter were measured.Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland-Altman analysis.Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Catholic University of Daegu, Daegu, Korea.

ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of the three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) system by comparing with that of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) QCA and two-dimensional (2D) QCA. 3D QCA, 2D QCA and IVUS QCA were performed in 45 vessel segments. The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel's lumen diameter were measured. Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland-Altman analysis. No differences were found in vessel lengths taken by 3D QCA and IVUS QCA (mean difference: 0.29 ± 1.06 mm, P = 0.07). When compared with IVUS QCA, 2D QCA underestimated vessel length (mean difference: -1.78 ± 2.55, P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement and a small bias between 3D QCA and IVUS QCA in the measurement of vessel length. The vessel lumen diameter measurements by 2D QCA and 3D QCA were significantly lower than that by IVUS QCA (mean difference: -0.64 ± 0.69, P < 0.001; -0.56 ± 0.52, P < 0.001 respectively). Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.

Show MeSH
Bland–Altman plots show degree of agreement between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and 2D QCA and IVUS (b) for measurement of vessel lumen diameter. Solid line indicates mean bias, and broken lines represent limit of agreement (1.96 SD). Bland-Altman analysis moderate agreement with moderate bias between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and moderate agreement with moderate bias between 2D QCA and IVUS (b) in measurement of vessel lumen diameter. 2D two-dimensional, 3D three-dimensional, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, QCA quantitative coronary analysis
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3473188&req=5

Fig5: Bland–Altman plots show degree of agreement between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and 2D QCA and IVUS (b) for measurement of vessel lumen diameter. Solid line indicates mean bias, and broken lines represent limit of agreement (1.96 SD). Bland-Altman analysis moderate agreement with moderate bias between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and moderate agreement with moderate bias between 2D QCA and IVUS (b) in measurement of vessel lumen diameter. 2D two-dimensional, 3D three-dimensional, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, QCA quantitative coronary analysis

Mentions: The proximal vessel lumen diameter measured by 2D QCA, 3D QCA and IVUS QCA was 3.01 ± 0.64 mm, 3.10 ± 0.74 mm and 3.66 ± 0.88 mm, respectively. When compared with IVUS, not only 2D QCA but also 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter (paired t-test, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) (Table 2). The vessel lumen diameter measurement by each vessel also underestimated both 2D QCA and 3D QCA by comparison with IVUS (Table 3). The proximal vessel lumen diameter measured by 3D QCA was correlated with that measured by IVUS stronger than that that measured by 2D QCA (Pearson correlation: 3D QCA and IVUS; 0.81 vs. 2D QCA and IVUS; 0.64) (Table 2). Bland–Altman analysis showed that 3D QCA and IVUS QCA had moderate agreement with moderate bias in measuring vessel lumen diameter (mean bias ± 1.96 SD, −0.56 ± 1.03 mm) and 2D QCA and IVUS QCA had moderate agreement with moderate bias in measuring vessel length (mean bias ± 1.96 SD, −0.64 ± 1.35 mm) (Fig. 5).Fig. 5


Assessment of three dimensional quantitative coronary analysis by using rotational angiography for measurement of vessel length and diameter.

Lee JB, Chang SG, Kim SY, Lee YS, Ryu JK, Choi JY, Kim KS, Park JS - Int J Cardiovasc Imaging (2011)

Bland–Altman plots show degree of agreement between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and 2D QCA and IVUS (b) for measurement of vessel lumen diameter. Solid line indicates mean bias, and broken lines represent limit of agreement (1.96 SD). Bland-Altman analysis moderate agreement with moderate bias between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and moderate agreement with moderate bias between 2D QCA and IVUS (b) in measurement of vessel lumen diameter. 2D two-dimensional, 3D three-dimensional, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, QCA quantitative coronary analysis
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3473188&req=5

Fig5: Bland–Altman plots show degree of agreement between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and 2D QCA and IVUS (b) for measurement of vessel lumen diameter. Solid line indicates mean bias, and broken lines represent limit of agreement (1.96 SD). Bland-Altman analysis moderate agreement with moderate bias between 3D QCA and IVUS (a) and moderate agreement with moderate bias between 2D QCA and IVUS (b) in measurement of vessel lumen diameter. 2D two-dimensional, 3D three-dimensional, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, QCA quantitative coronary analysis
Mentions: The proximal vessel lumen diameter measured by 2D QCA, 3D QCA and IVUS QCA was 3.01 ± 0.64 mm, 3.10 ± 0.74 mm and 3.66 ± 0.88 mm, respectively. When compared with IVUS, not only 2D QCA but also 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter (paired t-test, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) (Table 2). The vessel lumen diameter measurement by each vessel also underestimated both 2D QCA and 3D QCA by comparison with IVUS (Table 3). The proximal vessel lumen diameter measured by 3D QCA was correlated with that measured by IVUS stronger than that that measured by 2D QCA (Pearson correlation: 3D QCA and IVUS; 0.81 vs. 2D QCA and IVUS; 0.64) (Table 2). Bland–Altman analysis showed that 3D QCA and IVUS QCA had moderate agreement with moderate bias in measuring vessel lumen diameter (mean bias ± 1.96 SD, −0.56 ± 1.03 mm) and 2D QCA and IVUS QCA had moderate agreement with moderate bias in measuring vessel length (mean bias ± 1.96 SD, −0.64 ± 1.35 mm) (Fig. 5).Fig. 5

Bottom Line: The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel's lumen diameter were measured.Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland-Altman analysis.Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Catholic University of Daegu, Daegu, Korea.

ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of the three-dimensional (3D) quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) system by comparing with that of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) QCA and two-dimensional (2D) QCA. 3D QCA, 2D QCA and IVUS QCA were performed in 45 vessel segments. The obtained values for the branch to branch segment vessel length and the proximal part of the segment vessel's lumen diameter were measured. Inter-technique agreement was analyzed using paired sample t-test and Bland-Altman analysis. No differences were found in vessel lengths taken by 3D QCA and IVUS QCA (mean difference: 0.29 ± 1.06 mm, P = 0.07). When compared with IVUS QCA, 2D QCA underestimated vessel length (mean difference: -1.78 ± 2.55, P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement and a small bias between 3D QCA and IVUS QCA in the measurement of vessel length. The vessel lumen diameter measurements by 2D QCA and 3D QCA were significantly lower than that by IVUS QCA (mean difference: -0.64 ± 0.69, P < 0.001; -0.56 ± 0.52, P < 0.001 respectively). Rotational angiography with 3D reconstruction can provide a more accurate vessel length measurement, whereas 2D and 3D QCA underestimated the vessel lumen diameter compared with IVUS QCA.

Show MeSH