OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to use second-generation dual-source CT to assess the influence of size, degree of stenosis, luminal contrast attenuation, and plaque geometry on stenosis quantification in a coronary artery phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six vessel phantoms with three outer diameters (2, 3, and 4 mm), each containing three radiolucent plaques (72.2 HU) that simulated eccentric and concentric 43.8%, 75%, and 93.8% stenoses were made with a 3D printer system. These phantoms were filled with an iodine-saline solution mixture at luminal attenuations of 150, 200, 250, 300, and 350 HU and were attached to a cardiac motion simulator. Dual-source CT was performed with a standardized ECG-gated protocol (120 kV, 360 mAs per rotation) at a simulated heart rate of 70 beats/min. Two independent readers quantified the degree of stenosis using area-based measurements. RESULTS: All measurements were highly reproducible (intraclass correlation, ≥ 0.791; p < 0.001). The mean measured degree of stenosis for a phantom with a 3-mm outer diameter at 250-HU luminal attenuation was 49.0% ± 10.0% for 43.8% stenosis, 71.7% ± 9.6% for 75.0% stenosis, and 85.4% ± 5.9% for 93.8% stenosis. With decreasing phantom size, measurement error increased for all degrees of stenosis. The absolute error increased for measurements at a low luminal attenuation of 150 HU (p < 0.001) and for low-grade stenoses compared with medium-and high-grade stenoses (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results are an overview of factors that influence stenosis quantification in simulated coronary arteries. Dual-source CT is highly reproducible and accurate for quantification of low-density stenosis in vessels with a diameter of 3 mm and attenuation of at least 200 HU for different degrees of stenosis and plaque geometry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Toepker et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: