Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Radiology Research and Practice
Volume 2011, Article ID 103873, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/103873
Research Article

Dual-Source CT Angiography of Peripheral Arterial Stents: In Vitro Evaluation of 22 Different Stent Types

Department of Clinical Radiology, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Straβe 33, 48129 Münster, Germany

Received 15 February 2011; Revised 6 May 2011; Accepted 6 May 2011

Academic Editor: Andreas H. Mahnken

Copyright © 2011 Michael Köhler et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. D. Vorwerk, R. W. Günther, K. Schürmann, and G. Wendt, “Aortic and iliac stenoses: follow-up results of stent placement after insufficient balloon angioplasty in 118 cases,” Radiology, vol. 198, no. 1, pp. 45–48, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. S. P. Karas, M. B. Gravanis, E. Santoian, K. Robinson, S. B. King, and K. Anderberg, “Coronary intimal proliferation after balloon injury and stenting in swine: an animal model of restenosis,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 467–474, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. G. Ruehm, T. F. Hany, T. Pfammatter, J. F. Debatin, E. Schneider, and M. E. Ladd, “Pelvic and lower extremity arterial imaging: diagnostic performance of three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 174, no. 4, pp. 1127–1135, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. E. Sueyoshi, I. Sakamoto, Y. Matsuoka et al., “Aortoiliac and lower extremity arteries: comparison of three- dimensional dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR angiography and conventional angiography,” Radiology, vol. 210, no. 3, pp. 683–688, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. M. Lenhart, M. Völk, C. Manke et al., “Stent appearance at contrast-enhanced MR angiography: in vitro examination with 14 stents,” Radiology, vol. 217, no. 1, pp. 173–178, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. J. Link, J. C. Steffens, J. Brossmann, J. Graessner, S. Hackethal, and M. Heller, “Iliofemoral arterial occlusive disease: contrast-enhanced MR angiography for preinterventional evaluation and follow-up after stent placement,” Radiology, vol. 212, no. 2, pp. 371–377, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. D. Maintz, H. Kugel, F. Schellhammer, and P. Landwehr, “In vitro evaluation of intravascular stent artifacts in three-dimensional MR angiography,” Investigative Radiology, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 218–224, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. O. W. Hamer, T. Finkenzeller, I. Borisch et al., “In vivo evaluation of patency and in-stent stenoses after implantation of nitinol stents in iliac arteries using MR angiography,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 185, no. 5, pp. 1282–1288, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  9. O. W. Hamer, I. Borisch, C. Paetzel et al., “In vitro evaluation of stent patency and in-stent stenoses in 10 metallic stents using MR angiography,” British Journal of Radiology, vol. 79, no. 944, pp. 636–643, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  10. S. Krämer, J. Görich, A. J. Aschoff et al., “Diagnostic value of spiral-CT angiography in comparison with digital subtraction angiography before and after peripheral vascular intervention,” Angiology, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 599–606, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. F. Fraioli, C. Catalano, L. Bertoletti et al., “Multidetector-row CT angiography of renal artery stenosis in 50 consecutive patients: prospective interobserver comparison with DSA,” Radiologia Medica, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 459–468, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  12. C. Herzog, C. Grebe, A. H. Mahnken et al., “Peripheral artery stent visualization and in-stent stenosis analysis in 16-row computed tomography: an in-vitro evaluation,” European Radiology, vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 2276–2283, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  13. J. K. Willmann, B. Baumert, T. Schertler et al., “Aortoiliac and lower extremity arteries assessed with 16-detector row CT angiography: prospective comparison with digital subtraction angiography,” Radiology, vol. 236, no. 3, pp. 1083–1093, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  14. M. Blum, M. T. Schmook, R. E. Schernthaner et al., “Quantification and detectability of in-stent stenosis with CT angiography and MR angiography in arterial stents in vitro,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 189, no. 5, pp. 1238–1242, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  15. Z. Sun and A. M. D. Almutairi, “Diagnostic accuracy of 64 multislice CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis,” European Journal of Radiology, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 266–273, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  16. D. Maintz, M. C. Burg, H. Seifarth et al., “Update on multidetector coronary CT angiography of coronary stents: in vitro evaluation of 29 different stent types with dual-source CT,” European Radiology, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 42–49, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  17. D. Maintz, H. Seifarth, R. Raupach et al., “64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents,” European Radiology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 818–826, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  18. A. H. Mahnken, T. Seyfarth, T. G. Flohr et al., “Flat-panel detector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stents: phantom study in comparison with 16-slice spiral computed tomography,” Investigative Radiology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 8–13, 2005. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. H. Seifarth, M. Ozgun, R. Raupach et al., “64- Versus 16-slice CT angiography for coronary artery stent assessment: in vitro experience,” Investigative Radiology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 22–27, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  20. D. Maintz, R. Fischbach, K. U. Juergens et al., “Multislice CT angiography of the iliac arteries in the presence of various stents: in vitro evaluation of artifacts and lumen visibility,” Investigative Radiology, vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 699–704, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. D. Maintz, B. Tombach, K. U. Juergens et al., “Revealing in-stent stenoses of the iliac arteries: comparison of multidetector CT with MR angiography and digital radiographic angiography in a phantom model,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 179, no. 5, pp. 1319–1322, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. J. G. Eichhorn, F. R. Long, C. Jourdan et al., “Usefulness of multidetector CT imaging to assess vascular stents in children with congenital heart disease: an in vivo and in vitro study,” Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 544–551, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  23. M. Heuschmid, B. Wiesinger, G. Tepe et al., “Evaluation of various image reconstruction parameters in lower extremity stents using multidetector-row CT angiography: initial findings,” European Radiology, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 265–271, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  24. O. Donati, M. C. Burg, L. Desbiolles et al., “High-pitch 128-slice dual-source CT for the assessment of coronary stents in a phantom model,” Academic Radiology, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1366–1374, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  25. K. Perisinakis, E. Manousaki, K. Zourari et al., “Accuracy of multislice CT angiography for the assessment of in-stent restenoses in the iliac arteries at reduced dose: a phantom study,” British Journal of Radiology, vol. 84, no. 999, pp. 244–250, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed