The influence of electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography reconstruction into 8 or 10 cardiac phases on cardiac-pulsatility-induced motion quantification of stent grafts in the aorta

Q3 Medicine
Jaimy A. Simmering PhD , Deborah A. Zagers MSc , Robert H. Geelkerken PhD , Henny Kuipers BSc , Gerben A. te Riet o.g. Scholten MSc , Michel M.P.J. Reijnen PhD , Cornelis H. Slump PhD
{"title":"The influence of electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography reconstruction into 8 or 10 cardiac phases on cardiac-pulsatility-induced motion quantification of stent grafts in the aorta","authors":"Jaimy A. Simmering PhD ,&nbsp;Deborah A. Zagers MSc ,&nbsp;Robert H. Geelkerken PhD ,&nbsp;Henny Kuipers BSc ,&nbsp;Gerben A. te Riet o.g. Scholten MSc ,&nbsp;Michel M.P.J. Reijnen PhD ,&nbsp;Cornelis H. Slump PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jvssci.2023.100131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The goal of this study was to determine to what extent aortic stent graft motion quantification is comparable between electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated computed tomography (CT) scans with reconstructions into 8 and 10 cardiac phases on CT scanners from two different vendors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An experimental setup that induces motion of an aortic stent graft, according to a predefined aortic blood pressure wave, was placed in two CT scanners of different vendors. The stent graft motion was captured using an ECG-gated CT technique and quantified using dedicated analysis algorithms. The calculated motion amplitudes and total traveled path lengths of stent segmentations were compared between scans reconstructed into 8 and 10 phases and between the scanners, after validation with sensor measurements and repeated measurements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>No difference in motion amplitudes in z-direction (craniocaudal direction) was observed between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases (0.02 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.01 to 0.05 mm; <em>P</em> = .358). The z-amplitudes differed by 0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm; <em>P</em> = .003) between the different CT scanners. Path lengths differed 0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01-to 0.13 mm; <em>P</em> = .013) between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases and 0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm; <em>P</em> &lt; .001) between the different scanners.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The motion amplitudes can accurately be compared between 8 and 10 phases and between the two scanners, without differences larger than the voxel size of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm. Clinical motion analysis results of different ECG-gated CT scans and CT scanners can be compared up to the accuracy of the CT scan.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74035,"journal":{"name":"JVS-vascular science","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354/pdfft?md5=436e7fbbab4cd50b922f2bef3645a308&pid=1-s2.0-S2666350323000354-main.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JVS-vascular science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective

The goal of this study was to determine to what extent aortic stent graft motion quantification is comparable between electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated computed tomography (CT) scans with reconstructions into 8 and 10 cardiac phases on CT scanners from two different vendors.

Methods

An experimental setup that induces motion of an aortic stent graft, according to a predefined aortic blood pressure wave, was placed in two CT scanners of different vendors. The stent graft motion was captured using an ECG-gated CT technique and quantified using dedicated analysis algorithms. The calculated motion amplitudes and total traveled path lengths of stent segmentations were compared between scans reconstructed into 8 and 10 phases and between the scanners, after validation with sensor measurements and repeated measurements.

Results

No difference in motion amplitudes in z-direction (craniocaudal direction) was observed between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases (0.02 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.01 to 0.05 mm; P = .358). The z-amplitudes differed by 0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm; P = .003) between the different CT scanners. Path lengths differed 0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01-to 0.13 mm; P = .013) between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases and 0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm; P < .001) between the different scanners.

Conclusions

The motion amplitudes can accurately be compared between 8 and 10 phases and between the two scanners, without differences larger than the voxel size of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm. Clinical motion analysis results of different ECG-gated CT scans and CT scanners can be compared up to the accuracy of the CT scan.

心电图门控计算机断层扫描重建心脏8期或10期对主动脉支架移植心脏搏动诱导运动量化的影响
目的:本研究的目的是确定两家不同供应商的心电图(ECG)门控计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描重建为8期和10期心脏时,主动脉支架移植运动量化在多大程度上具有可比性。方法在两台不同厂商的CT扫描仪上放置一个实验装置,根据预先设定的主动脉血压波诱导主动脉支架移植物运动。使用ecg门控CT技术捕获支架运动,并使用专用分析算法进行量化。经过传感器测量和重复测量的验证,比较了重建为8和10阶段的扫描之间以及扫描仪之间计算的运动幅度和支架分段的总移动路径长度。结果8期和10期(0.02 mm;95%置信区间[CI], -0.01 ~ 0.05 mm;P = .358)。z-振幅相差0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm;P = 0.003)。路径长度相差0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01 ~ 0.13 mm;P = 0.013)和0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm;P & lt;.001)。结论8相和10相之间以及两种扫描仪之间的运动幅度可以准确比较,差异不超过0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm的体素尺寸。不同ecg门控CT扫描和CT扫描仪的临床运动分析结果可以比较到CT扫描的准确性。
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
28 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