Comparison of different quantitative coronary analysis systems: ARTREK, CAAS, and CMS. 1996

J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
Department of Cardiology, Hannover Medical School, Germany.

It has been known that the first generation quantitative coronary analysis systems overestimate small vessel sizes. In the 2nd generation the contour detection algorithms, e.g., of the new Cardiovascular Measurement System (CMS), were modified to correct for the limited resolution of the X-ray imaging chain. This study validated and compared the CMS with the well-known Coronary Angiography Analysis System (CAAS) and the vessel tracking program ARTREK in a phantom study and a clinical study. In addition, the influence of different acquisition media (cinefilm vs. digitally acquired angiograms) on the accuracy of quantitative analysis was examined. The phantom study comprised 19 stenotic or non-stenotic glass tubes with a diameter range from 0.54 mm to 4.9 mm. In the clinical study the mean diameters of 322 coronary segments were analysed and the results of the systems were compared among each other. The results of the phantom study were presented in terms of the mean difference (accuracy) between true and measured values. In the phantom study the overall accuracy of the CMS was -6 microns (ARTREK: 85 microns; CAAS: 35 microns) with an overestimation of small vessels of only -11 microns (ARTREK: 97 microns: CAAS: 51 microns). The clinical study showed that the CMS corrected the usually occurring overestimation of small coronary arteries and that the influence on the accuracy of different acquisition media is minor. Due to the modified algorithms the new CMS is able to measure coronary diameters down to 0.5 mm accurately. Therefore, the CMS seems to provide more precise measurements in quantitative analysis of small coronary diameters than CAAS and ARTREK.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries
D006801 Humans Members of the species Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens,Man (Taxonomy),Human,Man, Modern,Modern Man
D015203 Reproducibility of Results The statistical reproducibility of measurements (often in a clinical context), including the testing of instrumentation or techniques to obtain reproducible results. The concept includes reproducibility of physiological measurements, which may be used to develop rules to assess probability or prognosis, or response to a stimulus; reproducibility of occurrence of a condition; and reproducibility of experimental results. Reliability and Validity,Reliability of Result,Reproducibility Of Result,Reproducibility of Finding,Validity of Result,Validity of Results,Face Validity,Reliability (Epidemiology),Reliability of Results,Reproducibility of Findings,Test-Retest Reliability,Validity (Epidemiology),Finding Reproducibilities,Finding Reproducibility,Of Result, Reproducibility,Of Results, Reproducibility,Reliabilities, Test-Retest,Reliability, Test-Retest,Result Reliabilities,Result Reliability,Result Validities,Result Validity,Result, Reproducibility Of,Results, Reproducibility Of,Test Retest Reliability,Validity and Reliability,Validity, Face
D017023 Coronary Angiography Radiography of the vascular system of the heart muscle after injection of a contrast medium. Angiography, Coronary,Angiographies, Coronary,Coronary Angiographies
D019047 Phantoms, Imaging Devices or objects in various imaging techniques used to visualize or enhance visualization by simulating conditions encountered in the procedure. Phantoms are used very often in procedures employing or measuring x-irradiation or radioactive material to evaluate performance. Phantoms often have properties similar to human tissue. Water demonstrates absorbing properties similar to normal tissue, hence water-filled phantoms are used to map radiation levels. Phantoms are used also as teaching aids to simulate real conditions with x-ray or ultrasonic machines. (From Iturralde, Dictionary and Handbook of Nuclear Medicine and Clinical Imaging, 1990) Phantoms, Radiographic,Phantoms, Radiologic,Radiographic Phantoms,Radiologic Phantoms,Phantom, Radiographic,Phantom, Radiologic,Radiographic Phantom,Radiologic Phantom,Imaging Phantom,Imaging Phantoms,Phantom, Imaging

Related Publications

J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
September 1994, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
January 1995, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
May 2011, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
October 2009, The protein journal,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
December 2011, La Radiologia medica,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
December 1997, Zeitschrift fur Kardiologie,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
January 1986, Advances in space research : the official journal of the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR),
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
October 2017, Scientific reports,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
February 2014, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR,
J Hausleiter, and C W Nolte, and S Jost, and B Wiese, and M Sturm, and P R Lichtlen
April 2002, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions,
Copied contents to your clipboard!