We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of visibility of in-stent restenosis between conventional- and ultra-high spatial resolution computed tomography: coronary arterial phantom study.
Japanese Journal of Radiology 2022 March
PURPOSE: The purposes of this experimental study were to compare the quantitative and qualitative visibility of in-stent restenosis between conventional-resolution CT (CRCT) and ultra-high-resolution CT (U-HRCT) and to investigate the effects of the image reconstruction techniques on the visualization of in-stent restenosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A vessel tube with non-calcified plaque in a 3.0-mm stent was scanned by using CRCT and U-HRCT at 4 stent directions (0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees) to the through-plane direction. Hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR); model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR); deep-learning-based reconstruction (DLR) were used as reconstruction methods. The lumen size was assessed using the full width at half maximum method, and image quality was visually evaluated using 4-point scale.
RESULTS: U-HRCT had the significantly wider lumen sizes and narrower stent strut thickness than CRCT in three types of the reconstruction methods (P < 0.01). The lumen sizes for U-HRCT with 90 degrees were narrower than those with the other angle directions regardless of the reconstruction methods. Visual score was significantly higher for U-HRCT than CRCT (3.2 ± 0.7 vs 2.0 ± 0.4, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: U-HRCT quantitatively and qualitatively provided better visualization of in-stent restenosis compared to CRCT. Image quality of U-HRCT may be affected by stent angle.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A vessel tube with non-calcified plaque in a 3.0-mm stent was scanned by using CRCT and U-HRCT at 4 stent directions (0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees) to the through-plane direction. Hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR); model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR); deep-learning-based reconstruction (DLR) were used as reconstruction methods. The lumen size was assessed using the full width at half maximum method, and image quality was visually evaluated using 4-point scale.
RESULTS: U-HRCT had the significantly wider lumen sizes and narrower stent strut thickness than CRCT in three types of the reconstruction methods (P < 0.01). The lumen sizes for U-HRCT with 90 degrees were narrower than those with the other angle directions regardless of the reconstruction methods. Visual score was significantly higher for U-HRCT than CRCT (3.2 ± 0.7 vs 2.0 ± 0.4, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: U-HRCT quantitatively and qualitatively provided better visualization of in-stent restenosis compared to CRCT. Image quality of U-HRCT may be affected by stent angle.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app