1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(98)80295-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rotational digital subtraction carotid angiography: Technique and comparison with static digital subtraction angiography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0
7

Year Published

2002
2002
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
1
10
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…In that study (17), 16 or 32 projections (in four of 38 patients and 34 of 38 patients, respectively) were available for rotational angiography. Similar conclusions were previously described by Bosanac et al (18).…”
supporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In that study (17), 16 or 32 projections (in four of 38 patients and 34 of 38 patients, respectively) were available for rotational angiography. Similar conclusions were previously described by Bosanac et al (18).…”
supporting
confidence: 93%
“…Elgersma et al (17) and Bosanac et al (18), however, have demonstrated clearly that the limited number of projections available with conventional DSA may lead to an underestimation of stenosis when rotational angiography is used as the reference standard. This is because stenoses typically develop asymmetrically rather than in a concentric manner (22), and thus the narrowest portion of the residual lumen and, by inference, the maximum ICA stenosis will not always be depicted at conventional DSA in two projections (17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…IAA itself is changing, with the recent introduction of rotational IAA. As highlighted earlier, comparison of rotational IAA and conventional three-view IAA suggests that the latter underestimates the degree of stenosis in the 70-99% group, 90,91,127 which may explain why US and MRA appear to overestimate the degree of stenosis; it is difficult to discern which tests are correct, but it is important to remember that the relationship between stroke risk and percentage stenosis was calculated from conventional three-view IAA. Therefore, any systematic difference in the estimate of stenosis by another imaging technique would need to be factored into the equation relating stenosis to stroke risk to correct for this difference.…”
Section: Less Invasive Imaging Should Be Audited Continuously But How?mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Although IAA is the reference standard, there is recent evidence that patients with 70-99% ICA stenosis are at risk of underdiagnosis of stenosis degree by conventional (three-view) IAA compared with three-dimensional (3D) rotational angiography (a recently introduced IAA technique). 90,91,127 It is therefore likely that these patients 'overdiagnosed' by MRA or US were in fact being underdiagnosed by IAA. Which is right?…”
Section: Figure 16mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This position is, however, increasingly contentious. Arterial stenosis on DSA, particularly when eccentric, shows poor correlation with the reduction in luminal cross sectional area that is best demonstrated using three dimensional techniques and which is the determinant of haemodynamic effect 5 6. DSA is also invasive, with attendant risks of haemorrhage, vessel injury, cholesterol embolism syndrome, and contrast induced nephropathy 7.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%