Key result
Contrast-enhanced EBCT localizes all coronary stents and assesses patency in ~91% of patients.
Why the study?
Does contrast enhanced electron beam computed tomography accurately localize coronary stents and assess patency compared to coronary angiography in patients with Palmaz-Schatz stents?
Observational (n=22)
Does contrast enhanced electron beam computed tomography accurately localize coronary stents and assess patency compared to coronary angiography in patients with Palmaz-Schatz stents?
Electron beam computed tomography can reliably localize coronary stents and assess vessel patency non-invasively.
UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was the evaluation of electron beam computed tomography as a non-invasive method to localize coronary stents and to document patency in stented vessel segments. METHODS: Twenty-two patients (16m/6f, 58 +/- 7.8 years) with coronary Palmaz-Schatz stents were examined. Contrast enhanced electron beam computed tomography using an Evolution scanner (Siemens) and coronary angiography were carried out within 7 days of each other. Stent localization was performed using the single-slice mode of the electron beam computed tomography scanner. Patency of the coronary target segment was assessed using the multi-slice mode after peripheral venous injection of a 40 ml bolus of contrast medium (Ultravist 370). Qualitative image analysis of a cine loop of 10 consecutive frames and quantitative analysis of densitometric curves in a region of interest distal to the stented vessel segment were performed. RESULTS: All stented vessel segments were identified. In 20 patients (91%), qualitative assessment of contrast enhancement patterns enabled stent patency to be evaluated. In 18 patients (90%), contrast medium was visualized distal to the stent. Quantitative coronary angiography confirmed that the stented vessel segments were not stenosed. Densitometric curves obtained in 16 of these 18 patients yielded contrast enhancement distal to the stented vessel segment of 63 +/- 6% compared to the aorta. In one patient, qualitative and quantitative analysis showed prolonged contrast enhancement of reduced density, which hinted at a stenosis related to the stented vessel segment. Coronary angiography revealed subtotal occlusion of the stented vessel directly distal to the stent. In another patient, no contrast visualization of the vessel distal to the stent was achieved. Coronary angiography revealed complete stent occlusion in this case. CONCLUSION: Electron beam computed tomography can reliably localize coronary stents and may become a useful tool for providing information on stented vessel segment patency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schmermund et al. (1996) conducted an observational in Coronary Palmaz-Schatz stents (n=22). Contrast enhanced electron beam computed tomography vs. Coronary angiography was evaluated on Localization of coronary stents and documentation of patency in stented vessel segments. Contrast enhanced electron beam computed tomography successfully localized all coronary stents and enabled evaluation of stent patency in 91% of patients.