title: Dual-Source CT Angiography of Peripheral Arterial Stents: In Vitro Evaluation of 22 Different Stent Types.
abstract: Purpose. To test different peripheral arterial stents using four image reconstruction approaches with respect to lumen visualization, lumen attenuation and image noise in dual-source multidetector row CT (DSCT) in vitro. Methods and Materials. 22 stents (nitinol, steel, cobalt-alloy, tantalum, platinum alloy) were examined in a vessel phantom. All stents were imaged in axial orientation with standard parameters. Image reconstructions were obtained with four different convolution kernels. To evaluate visualization characteristics of the stent, the lumen diameter, intraluminal density and noise were measured. Results. The mean percentage of the visible stent lumen diameter from the nominal stent diameter was 74.5% ± 5.7 for the medium-sharp kernel, 72.8% ± 6.4 for the medium, 70.8% ± 6.4 for the medium-smooth and 67.6% ± 6.6 for the smooth kernel. Mean values of lumen attenuation were 299.7HU ± 127 (medium-sharp), 273.9HU ± 68 (medium), 270.7HU ± 53 (medium-smooth) and 265.8HU ± 43. Mean image noise was: 54.6 ± 6.3, 20.5 ± 1.7, 16.3 ± 1.7, 14.0 ± 2 respectively. Conclusion. Visible stent lumen diameter varies depending on stent type and scan parameters. Lumen diameter visibility increases with the sharpness of the reconstruction kernel. Smoother kernels provide more realistic density measurements inside the stent lumen and less image noise.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Radiology, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Stra β e 33, 48129 Münster, Germany.
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Köhler
authors.forename: Matthias C
authors.initials: MC
authors.lastname: Burg
authors.forename: Alexander C
authors.initials: AC
authors.lastname: Bunck
authors.forename: Walter
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Heindel
authors.forename: Harald
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Seifarth
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Maintz
references.citation: Radiology. 2005 Sep;236(3):1083-93
references.pmid: 16055691
references.citation: Radiol Med. 2006 Apr;111(3):459-68
references.pmid: 16683091
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2005 Nov;15(11):2276-83
references.pmid: 16021457
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Nov;185(5):1282-8
references.pmid: 16247150
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2007 Jan;17(1):265-71
references.pmid: 16733677
references.citation: Invest Radiol. 2005 Jan;40(1):8-13
references.pmid: 15597014
references.citation: Radiology. 1996 Jan;198(1):45-8
references.pmid: 8539403
references.citation: Invest Radiol. 2006 Jan;41(1):22-7
references.pmid: 16355036
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Nov;189(5):1238-42
references.pmid: 17954666
references.citation: Invest Radiol. 2001 Apr;36(4):218-24
references.pmid: 11283419
references.citation: J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992 Aug;20(2):467-74
references.pmid: 1634687
references.citation: Radiology. 1999 Mar;210(3):683-8
references.pmid: 10207467
references.citation: Br J Radiol. 2011 Mar;84(999):244-50
references.pmid: 21325364
references.citation: Acad Radiol. 2010 Nov;17(11):1366-74
references.pmid: 20801697
references.citation: Radiology. 2000 Oct;217(1):173-8
references.pmid: 11012441
references.citation: Angiology. 1998 Aug;49(8):599-606
references.pmid: 9717888
references.citation: Invest Radiol. 2001 Dec;36(12):699-704
references.pmid: 11753140
references.citation: Radiology. 1999 Aug;212(2):371-7
references.pmid: 10429692
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2009 Jan;19(1):42-9
references.pmid: 18682956
references.citation: Eur J Radiol. 2010 Feb;73(2):266-73
references.pmid: 19056191
references.citation: Br J Radiol. 2006 Aug;79(944):636-43
references.pmid: 16641417
references.citation: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Oct 1;72(4):544-51
references.pmid: 18814228
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Apr;174(4):1127-35
references.pmid: 10749264
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2006 Apr;16(4):818-26
references.pmid: 16333623
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Nov;179(5):1319-22
references.pmid: 12388521