Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31766961›Full record

ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2020

A technical note on intra-arterial cone-beam computed tomography for the evaluation of flow-diverter stents: Image quality differences between diluted and non-diluted contrast medium.

Naci Kocer, Sedat G Kandemirli, Daniel Ruijters, Michalis Mantatzis, Osman Kizilkilic, Civan Islak

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 81% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Naci KocerDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Cerrahapasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Sedat G KandemirliDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Cerrahapasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3976-4062
Daniel RuijtersPhilips Healthcare, Image Guided Therapy Systems Innovation, Best, the Netherlands.
Michalis MantatzisDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Democritus University of Thrace, Komotini, Greece.
Osman KizilkilicDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Cerrahapasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6620-8934
Civan IslakDivision of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Cerrahapasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Istanbul University · TRDemocritus University of Thrace · GRPhilips (Netherlands) · NLUniversity of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDesign of flow-diverter stents for flexibility, tractability, and low profile limits their radiopacity on conventional digital subtraction angiography. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) offers higher spatial resolution for the evaluation of flow-diverter stents. However, CBCT requires optimal dilution and timing of contrast medium for simultaneous visualization of the stent, arterial lumen, and vessel wall. There are only limited data on the effects of different contrast dilutions on CBCT image quality in neurointerventional applications. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn our institution, intra-arterial CBCTs were acquired during stent deployment and at follow-ups with 10% diluted contrast. We had recently started acquiring intra-arterial CBCTs with non-diluted contrast. Retrospective analysis of our flow-diverter data identified eight cases with different aneurysm locations who had intra-arterial CBCT with 10% diluted contrast immediately after flow-diverter stent deployment and with non-diluted contrast technique during follow-ups. For each case, the image quality between diluted and non-diluted contrast techniques was compared qualitatively by assessing stent visualization and quantitatively by plotting gray-scale intensity values along the vessel lumen.

resultsIn two sets of CBCT images per each case, there was no substantial difference between diluted and non-diluted CBTC techniques for the evaluation of stent architecture and lumen opacification. Gray-scale intensity values perpendicular to the lumen revealed similar intensity values along the neighboring parenchyma, vessel wall, and lumen for the two different contrast techniques.

conclusionIntra-arterial CBCT angiography can be performed without contrast dilution and still achieve adequate image quality in certain cerebral aneurysms treated with flow diverter. The non-diluted contrast technique avoids the time loss during preparation of diluted contrast and installation of diluted contrast to the injector in angiography suites with a single power injector.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaStentsAngiography, Digital SubtractionCerebral AngiographyCerebral ArteriesComputed Tomography AngiographyCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeContrast Mediacone-beam computed tomographycontrast mediaFlow diverter

Identifiers

PMID31766961
PMCPMC7507222
OpenAlexW2991305757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.