Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT and CT angiography can be used interchangeably for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter.

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Acta radiologica open Pub Date : 2022-10-12 eCollection Date: 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1177/20584601221132461
Jens Borgbjerg, Heidi S Christensen, Rozh Al-Mashhadi, Martin Bøgsted, Jens B Frøkjær, Lise Medrud, Nis Elbrønd Larsen, Jes S Lindholt
{"title":"Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT and CT angiography can be used interchangeably for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter.","authors":"Jens Borgbjerg,&nbsp;Heidi S Christensen,&nbsp;Rozh Al-Mashhadi,&nbsp;Martin Bøgsted,&nbsp;Jens B Frøkjær,&nbsp;Lise Medrud,&nbsp;Nis Elbrønd Larsen,&nbsp;Jes S Lindholt","doi":"10.1177/20584601221132461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Routine CT scans may increasingly be used to document normal aortic size and to detect incidental abdominal aortic aneurysms.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT (ULDNC-CT) can be used instead of the gold standard CT angiography (CTA) for assessment of maximal abdominal aortic diameter.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 50 patients who underwent CTA and a normal-dose non-contrast CT for suspected renal artery stenosis. ULDNC-CT datasets were generated from the normal-dose non-contrast CT datasets using a simulation technique. Using the centerline technique, radiology consultants (<i>n</i> = 4) and residents (<i>n</i> = 3) determined maximal abdominal aortic diameter. The limits of agreement with the mean (LOAM) was used to access observer agreement. LOAM represents how much a measurement by a single observer may plausibly deviate from the mean of all observers on the specific subject.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Observers completed 1400 measurements encompassing repeated CTA and ULDNC-CT measurements. The mean diameter was 24.0 and 25.0 mm for CTA and ULDNC-CT, respectively, yielding a significant but minor mean difference of 1.0 mm. The 95% LOAM reproducibility was similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT (2.3 vs 2.3 mm). In addition, the 95% LOAM and mean diameters were similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT when observers were grouped as consultants and residents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT exhibited similar accuracy and reproducibility of measurements compared with CTA for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter supporting that ULDNC-CT can be used interchangeably with CTA in the lower range of aortic sizes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72063,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1e/09/10.1177_20584601221132461.PMC9561642.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20584601221132461","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Routine CT scans may increasingly be used to document normal aortic size and to detect incidental abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Purpose: To determine whether ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT (ULDNC-CT) can be used instead of the gold standard CT angiography (CTA) for assessment of maximal abdominal aortic diameter.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 50 patients who underwent CTA and a normal-dose non-contrast CT for suspected renal artery stenosis. ULDNC-CT datasets were generated from the normal-dose non-contrast CT datasets using a simulation technique. Using the centerline technique, radiology consultants (n = 4) and residents (n = 3) determined maximal abdominal aortic diameter. The limits of agreement with the mean (LOAM) was used to access observer agreement. LOAM represents how much a measurement by a single observer may plausibly deviate from the mean of all observers on the specific subject.

Results: Observers completed 1400 measurements encompassing repeated CTA and ULDNC-CT measurements. The mean diameter was 24.0 and 25.0 mm for CTA and ULDNC-CT, respectively, yielding a significant but minor mean difference of 1.0 mm. The 95% LOAM reproducibility was similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT (2.3 vs 2.3 mm). In addition, the 95% LOAM and mean diameters were similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT when observers were grouped as consultants and residents.

Conclusions: Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT exhibited similar accuracy and reproducibility of measurements compared with CTA for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter supporting that ULDNC-CT can be used interchangeably with CTA in the lower range of aortic sizes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

超低剂量非对比CT和CT血管造影可互换用于评估最大腹主动脉直径。
背景:常规CT扫描可能越来越多地用于记录正常主动脉大小和发现偶然的腹主动脉瘤。目的:探讨超低剂量非对比CT (ULDNC-CT)是否可以代替金标准CT血管造影(CTA)评估腹主动脉最大内径。材料和方法:本回顾性研究包括50例因怀疑肾动脉狭窄而行CTA和正常剂量非对比CT检查的患者。ULDNC-CT数据集是使用模拟技术从正常剂量非对比CT数据集生成的。利用中心线技术,放射学顾问(n = 4)和住院医师(n = 3)确定了最大腹主动脉直径。使用与均值一致的极限(LOAM)来获取观察者的一致性。LOAM表示单个观察者的测量值与特定主题上所有观察者的平均值的合理偏差程度。结果:观察人员完成了1400次测量,包括重复的CTA和ULDNC-CT测量。CTA和ULDNC-CT的平均直径分别为24.0和25.0 mm,平均相差1.0 mm。CTA和ULDNC-CT的95% LOAM重现性相似(2.3 vs 2.3 mm)。此外,当观察者被分组为顾问和住院医生时,CTA和ULDNC-CT的95% LOAM和平均直径相似。结论:与CTA相比,超低剂量非对比CT在评估最大腹主动脉直径方面具有相似的准确性和可重复性,支持ULDNC-CT可与CTA在主动脉直径较低范围内互换使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信