Background and purposeThe screening tool for diagnosing lower extremity arterial disease is the assessment of the ankle-brachial index (ABI), which is widely used in general practice. However, resting ABI can easily produce a false negative result. In light of this, our goal was to determine the proportion of definitive diagnoses (peripheral arterial disease [PAD] confirmed or refuted) among patients screened in general practice, and the rate of cases in which the need for further specialized examination is necessary, with special attention to groups having non-compressible arteries and ABI negative symptomatic status. The aim of our work is to improve the efficiency of primary health care screening in PAD and reduce the extremely high domestic amputation ratio.Patients and methodsEight hundred and sixteen patients were screened. We used the Edinburgh Questionnaire and recorded medical histories, major risk factors, current complaints, and medication. Physical examinations were performed, including ABI testing.ResultsThirty-three percent complained about lower extremity claudication; 23% had abnormal ABI values; 13% of the patients within the normal ABI range had complaints of dysbasia; and 12% were in the non-compressible artery group. The ABI-negative symptomatic group’s risk factor profile showed a close similarity to the clear PAD-positive and non-compressible artery groups.ConclusionThe percentage of PAD could be higher than the number of patients diagnosed by ABI screening. Nearly a quarter of the population fell into the non-compressible artery and ABI-negative symptomatic groups, together defined as the “murky zone”. When screening purposely for PAD, these patients deserve special attention due to the insufficient selectivity and sensitivity of measurements. If there is high clinical suspicion of PAD in spite of normal ABI values, further assessment may be considered.

Purpose In retrospective clinical studies digital variance angiography (DVA) provided higher contrast-to-noise ratio and better image quality than digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Our aim was to verify the clinical usefulness and benefits of DVA in carbon dioxide (CO 2)-assisted lower limb interventions. Materials and Methods A workstation running the DVA software was integrated into a Siemens Artis Zee with Pure angiography system, and this new image processing technology was used in four patients (3 male, 1 female, age: 76.2 ± 4.2 years) with peripheral artery disease (PAD, Rutherford 2-3) and impaired renal function (average eGFR 25.5 ± 11.2 ml/min/1.73 m 2). The DSA and DVA images of 46 CO 2-assisted runs were visually evaluated by five experts in single-image evaluation using a 5-grade Likert scale and in paired comparisons. Results DVA images received significantly higher score (3.84 ± 0.10) than DSA images (3.31 ± 0.10, p \ 0.001). Raters preferred DVA images in terms of diagnostic value and usefulness for therapeutic decisions in 85.2% and 83.9% of all comparisons, respectively. These benefits were achieved at lower frame rates (1-3 FPS) than usually recommended for CO 2 angiography (4-6 FPS). No adverse events were recorded during or after the procedures. Conclusions Our initial experience shows that DVA might facilitate the correct diagnostic and therapeutic decisions, and potentially help to reduce radiation exposure in lower limb CO 2 angiography. Although the dose management capabilities of DVA have to be validated in further clinical studies, this technology might be a useful new tool in the operating room and contributes to the safety and efficacy of CO 2-enhanced endovascular interventions. Level of Evidence Level IV. Keywords Digital variance angiography (DVA) Á Carbon dioxide (CO 2) angiography Á Image quality Á Impaired renal function Á Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) Á Lower limb interventions Á Dose management Á Iodine-free angiography Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (

Purpose: To illustrate dynamic, time-resolved CTA (d-CTA) imaging technique in characterizing aortic endoleak type/inflow using quantitative parameters and its value in providing image guidance for targeted treatment approach. Technique: Dedicated endoleak protocol involved acquiring multiple time-resolved contrast enhanced scans using third-generation CT scanner (Somatom Force®, Siemens Healthineers). Parameters such as scan field of view (FOV), kV, number/timing of scans were customized based on patient’s body-mass-index, timing bolus, and prior imaging findings. D-CTA image datasets were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively using time-attenuation curves (TAC) analysis after motion correction using a dedicated software ( syngo.via®, Siemens). D-CTA findings from 4 illustrative cases demonstrating type I, type II (inferior mesenteric and lumbar artery inflow), and type III endoleak were illustrated. TAC analysis with time to peak parameter enabled better characterization of endoleak type and inflow. During endoleak intervention, target vessels from d-CTA images were electronically annotated and overlaid on fluoroscopy using 2D−3D image fusion to provide image guidance for targeted treatment. Conclusion: D-CTA imaging with TAC analysis characterizes aortic endoleak type and inflow, in addition to providing image guidance for targeted endoleak treatment. Such dynamic, time-resolved imaging techniques may provide further insights into understanding aortic endoleak that remains an Achilles heel for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Our aim was to investigate whether the previously observed higher contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality of Digital Variance Angiography (DVA) - compared to Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA) - can be used to reduce radiation exposure in lower limb X-ray angiography. This prospective study enrolled 30 peripheral artery disease patients (mean ± SD age 70 ± 8 years) undergoing diagnostic angiography. In all patients, both normal (1.2 µGy/frame; 100%) and low-dose (0.36 µGy/frame; 30%) protocols were used for the acquisition of images in three anatomical regions (abdominal, femoral, crural). The CNR of DSA and DVA images were calculated, and the visual quality was evaluated by seven specialists using a 5-grade Likert scale. For investigating non-inferiority, the difference of low-dose DVA and normal dose DSA scores (DVA30-DSA100) was analyzed. DVA produced two- to three-fold CNR and significantly higher visual score than DSA. DVA30 proved to be superior to DSA100 in the crural region (difference 0.25 ± 0.07, p < 0.001), and there was no significant difference in the femoral (− 0.08 ± 0.06, p = 0.435) and abdominal (− 0.10 ± 0.09, p = 0.350) regions. Our data show that DVA allows about 70% reduction of DSA-related radiation exposure in lower limb X-ray angiography, providing a potential new radiation protection tool for the patients and the medical staff.