In vitro validation and comparison of different software packages or algorithms for coronary bifurcation analysis using calibrated phantoms

Implications for clinical practice and research of bifurcation stenting

Yuki Ishibashi, Maik J. Grundeken, Shimpei Nakatani, Javaid Iqbal, Marie Angele More, Philippe Genereux, Chrysafios Girasis, Jolanda J. Wentzel, Hector M. Garcia-Garcia, Yoshinobu Onuma, Patrick W. Serruys

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) software dedicated for bifurcation lesions compared with conventional single-vessel analysis remains unknown. Furthermore, comparison of different bifurcation analysis algorithms has not been performed. Methods: Six plexiglas phantoms with 18 bifurcations were manufactured with a tolerance < 10 μm. The bifurcation angiograms were analyzed using Cardiovascular Angiography Analysis System (CAAS; Version 5.10, Pie Medical Imaging, Maastricht, The Netherlands) and QAngio XA (Version 7.3, Medis Medical Imaging System BV, Leiden, The Netherlands) software packages. Results: Conventional single-vessel analysis underestimated the reference vessel diameter and percent diameter stenosis in the proximal main vessel while it overestimated these parameters in the distal main vessel and side branch. CAAS software showed better overall accuracy and precision than QAngio XA (with automatic Y- or T-shape bifurcation algorithm selection) for various phantom diameters including minimum lumen diameter (0.012 ± 0.103 mm vs. 0.041 ± 0.322 mm, P = 0.003), reference vessel diameter (-0.050 ± 0.043 mm vs. 0.116 ± 0.610 mm, P = 0.026), and % diameter stenosis (-0.94 ± 4.07 % vs. 1.74 ± 7.49 %, P = 0.041). QAngio XA demonstrated higher minimal lumen diameter, reference vessel diameter, and % diameter stenosis when compared to the actual phantom diameters; however, the accuracy of these parameters improved to a similar level as CAAS when the sole T-shape algorithm in the QAnxio XA was used. Conclusion: The use of the single-vessel QCA method is inaccurate in bifurcation lesions. Both CAAS and QAngio XA (when the T shape is systematically used) bifurcation software packages are suitable for quantitative assessment of bifurcations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)554-563
Number of pages10
JournalCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume85
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Software
Pathologic Constriction
Diagnostic Imaging
Coronary Angiography
Research
Netherlands
Angiography
Polymethyl Methacrylate
In Vitro Techniques

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Ishibashi, Yuki ; Grundeken, Maik J. ; Nakatani, Shimpei ; Iqbal, Javaid ; More, Marie Angele ; Genereux, Philippe ; Girasis, Chrysafios ; Wentzel, Jolanda J. ; Garcia-Garcia, Hector M. ; Onuma, Yoshinobu ; Serruys, Patrick W. / In vitro validation and comparison of different software packages or algorithms for coronary bifurcation analysis using calibrated phantoms : Implications for clinical practice and research of bifurcation stenting. In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2015 ; Vol. 85, No. 4. pp. 554-563.
@article{f6d7b777072546bf80182c44a5045fd0,
title = "In vitro validation and comparison of different software packages or algorithms for coronary bifurcation analysis using calibrated phantoms: Implications for clinical practice and research of bifurcation stenting",
abstract = "Background: The accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) software dedicated for bifurcation lesions compared with conventional single-vessel analysis remains unknown. Furthermore, comparison of different bifurcation analysis algorithms has not been performed. Methods: Six plexiglas phantoms with 18 bifurcations were manufactured with a tolerance < 10 μm. The bifurcation angiograms were analyzed using Cardiovascular Angiography Analysis System (CAAS; Version 5.10, Pie Medical Imaging, Maastricht, The Netherlands) and QAngio XA (Version 7.3, Medis Medical Imaging System BV, Leiden, The Netherlands) software packages. Results: Conventional single-vessel analysis underestimated the reference vessel diameter and percent diameter stenosis in the proximal main vessel while it overestimated these parameters in the distal main vessel and side branch. CAAS software showed better overall accuracy and precision than QAngio XA (with automatic Y- or T-shape bifurcation algorithm selection) for various phantom diameters including minimum lumen diameter (0.012 ± 0.103 mm vs. 0.041 ± 0.322 mm, P = 0.003), reference vessel diameter (-0.050 ± 0.043 mm vs. 0.116 ± 0.610 mm, P = 0.026), and {\%} diameter stenosis (-0.94 ± 4.07 {\%} vs. 1.74 ± 7.49 {\%}, P = 0.041). QAngio XA demonstrated higher minimal lumen diameter, reference vessel diameter, and {\%} diameter stenosis when compared to the actual phantom diameters; however, the accuracy of these parameters improved to a similar level as CAAS when the sole T-shape algorithm in the QAnxio XA was used. Conclusion: The use of the single-vessel QCA method is inaccurate in bifurcation lesions. Both CAAS and QAngio XA (when the T shape is systematically used) bifurcation software packages are suitable for quantitative assessment of bifurcations.",
author = "Yuki Ishibashi and Grundeken, {Maik J.} and Shimpei Nakatani and Javaid Iqbal and More, {Marie Angele} and Philippe Genereux and Chrysafios Girasis and Wentzel, {Jolanda J.} and Garcia-Garcia, {Hector M.} and Yoshinobu Onuma and Serruys, {Patrick W.}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/ccd.25618",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "554--563",
journal = "Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1522-1946",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "4",

}

In vitro validation and comparison of different software packages or algorithms for coronary bifurcation analysis using calibrated phantoms : Implications for clinical practice and research of bifurcation stenting. / Ishibashi, Yuki; Grundeken, Maik J.; Nakatani, Shimpei; Iqbal, Javaid; More, Marie Angele; Genereux, Philippe; Girasis, Chrysafios; Wentzel, Jolanda J.; Garcia-Garcia, Hector M.; Onuma, Yoshinobu; Serruys, Patrick W.

In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 85, No. 4, 01.03.2015, p. 554-563.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - In vitro validation and comparison of different software packages or algorithms for coronary bifurcation analysis using calibrated phantoms

T2 - Implications for clinical practice and research of bifurcation stenting

AU - Ishibashi, Yuki

AU - Grundeken, Maik J.

AU - Nakatani, Shimpei

AU - Iqbal, Javaid

AU - More, Marie Angele

AU - Genereux, Philippe

AU - Girasis, Chrysafios

AU - Wentzel, Jolanda J.

AU - Garcia-Garcia, Hector M.

AU - Onuma, Yoshinobu

AU - Serruys, Patrick W.

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Background: The accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) software dedicated for bifurcation lesions compared with conventional single-vessel analysis remains unknown. Furthermore, comparison of different bifurcation analysis algorithms has not been performed. Methods: Six plexiglas phantoms with 18 bifurcations were manufactured with a tolerance < 10 μm. The bifurcation angiograms were analyzed using Cardiovascular Angiography Analysis System (CAAS; Version 5.10, Pie Medical Imaging, Maastricht, The Netherlands) and QAngio XA (Version 7.3, Medis Medical Imaging System BV, Leiden, The Netherlands) software packages. Results: Conventional single-vessel analysis underestimated the reference vessel diameter and percent diameter stenosis in the proximal main vessel while it overestimated these parameters in the distal main vessel and side branch. CAAS software showed better overall accuracy and precision than QAngio XA (with automatic Y- or T-shape bifurcation algorithm selection) for various phantom diameters including minimum lumen diameter (0.012 ± 0.103 mm vs. 0.041 ± 0.322 mm, P = 0.003), reference vessel diameter (-0.050 ± 0.043 mm vs. 0.116 ± 0.610 mm, P = 0.026), and % diameter stenosis (-0.94 ± 4.07 % vs. 1.74 ± 7.49 %, P = 0.041). QAngio XA demonstrated higher minimal lumen diameter, reference vessel diameter, and % diameter stenosis when compared to the actual phantom diameters; however, the accuracy of these parameters improved to a similar level as CAAS when the sole T-shape algorithm in the QAnxio XA was used. Conclusion: The use of the single-vessel QCA method is inaccurate in bifurcation lesions. Both CAAS and QAngio XA (when the T shape is systematically used) bifurcation software packages are suitable for quantitative assessment of bifurcations.

AB - Background: The accuracy and precision of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) software dedicated for bifurcation lesions compared with conventional single-vessel analysis remains unknown. Furthermore, comparison of different bifurcation analysis algorithms has not been performed. Methods: Six plexiglas phantoms with 18 bifurcations were manufactured with a tolerance < 10 μm. The bifurcation angiograms were analyzed using Cardiovascular Angiography Analysis System (CAAS; Version 5.10, Pie Medical Imaging, Maastricht, The Netherlands) and QAngio XA (Version 7.3, Medis Medical Imaging System BV, Leiden, The Netherlands) software packages. Results: Conventional single-vessel analysis underestimated the reference vessel diameter and percent diameter stenosis in the proximal main vessel while it overestimated these parameters in the distal main vessel and side branch. CAAS software showed better overall accuracy and precision than QAngio XA (with automatic Y- or T-shape bifurcation algorithm selection) for various phantom diameters including minimum lumen diameter (0.012 ± 0.103 mm vs. 0.041 ± 0.322 mm, P = 0.003), reference vessel diameter (-0.050 ± 0.043 mm vs. 0.116 ± 0.610 mm, P = 0.026), and % diameter stenosis (-0.94 ± 4.07 % vs. 1.74 ± 7.49 %, P = 0.041). QAngio XA demonstrated higher minimal lumen diameter, reference vessel diameter, and % diameter stenosis when compared to the actual phantom diameters; however, the accuracy of these parameters improved to a similar level as CAAS when the sole T-shape algorithm in the QAnxio XA was used. Conclusion: The use of the single-vessel QCA method is inaccurate in bifurcation lesions. Both CAAS and QAngio XA (when the T shape is systematically used) bifurcation software packages are suitable for quantitative assessment of bifurcations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923247115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84923247115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ccd.25618

DO - 10.1002/ccd.25618

M3 - Article

VL - 85

SP - 554

EP - 563

JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1522-1946

IS - 4

ER -