Search

Purpose Digital variance angiography (DVA), a recently developed image processing technology, provided higher contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality (IQ) during lower limb interventions than digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Our aim was to investigate whether this quality improvement can be observed also during liver transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Materials and Methods We retrospectively compared the CNR and IQ parameters of DSA and DVA images from 25 patients (65% male, mean ± SD age: 67.5 ± 11.2 years) underwent TACE intervention at our institute. CNR was calculated on 50 images. IQ of every image set was evaluated by 5 experts using 4-grade Likert scales. Both single image evaluation and paired image comparison were performed in a blinded and randomized manner. The diagnostic value was evaluated based on the possibility to identify lesions and feeding arteries. Results DVA provided significantly higher CNR (mean CNRDVA/CNRDSA was 1.33). DVA images received significantly higher individual Likert score (mean ± SEM 3.34 ± 0,08 vs. 2.89 ± 0.11, Wilcoxon signed-rank p p Conclusion In our study, DVA provided higher quality images and better diagnostic insight than DSA; therefore, DVA could represent a useful tool in liver TACE interventions. Level of evidence III Non-consecutive study.

PURPOSE To evaluate the potential benefits of digital variance angiography (DVA) in selective lower limb angiography and to compare the performance of 2 DVA algorithms (conventional DVA1 and the recently developed DVA2) to that of digital subtraction angiography (DSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS From November 2019 to May 2020, 112 iodinated contrast media (ICM) and 40 carbon dioxide (CO2) angiograms were collected from 15 and 13 peripheral artery disease patients, respectively. The DVA files were retrospectively generated from the same unsubtracted source file as DSA. The objectively calculated contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and the subjective visual image quality of DSA, DVA1, and DVA2 images were statistically compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The images were evaluated by 6 radiologists (R.P.T., S.V., A.M.K., S.S.A., O.E., and J.S.) from 2 centers using a 5-grade Likert scale. RESULTS Both DVA algorithms produced similar increase (at least 2-fold) in CNR values (P < .001) and significantly higher image quality scores than DSA, independent of the contrast agent used. The overall scores with ICM were 3.61 ± 0.05 for DSA, 4.30 ± 0.04 for DVA1, and 4.33 ± 0.04 for DVA2 (each P < .001 vs DSA). The scores for CO2 were 3.10 ± 0.14 for DSA, 3.63 ± 0.13 for DVA1 (P < .001 vs DSA), and 3.38 ± 0.13 for DVA2 (P < .05 vs DSA). CONCLUSIONS DVA provides higher CNR and significantly better image quality in selective lower limb interventions irrespective of the contrast agent used. Between DVA algorithms, DVA1 is preferred because of its identical or better image quality than DVA2. DVA can potentially help the interventional decision process and its quality reserve might allow dose management (radiation/ICM reduction) in the future.

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 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.

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 (CO2)-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 m2). The DSA and DVA images of 46 CO2-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 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 CO2 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 CO2-enhanced endovascular interventions. Level of Evidence Level IV.

In previous clinical studies digital variance angiography (DVA) provided higher contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality in lower extremity angiography than digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Our aim was to investigate whether DVA has similar quality reserve in prostatic artery embolization (PAE). The secondary aim was to explore the potential advantages of the color-coded DVA (ccDVA) technology in PAE.This retrospective study evaluated 108 angiographic acquisitions from 30 patients (mean ± SD age 68.0 ± 8.9, range 41-87) undergoing PAE between May and October 2020. DSA and DVA images were generated from the same unsubtracted acquisition, and their CNR was calculated. Visual evaluation of DVA and DSA image quality was performed by four experienced interventional radiologists in a randomized, blinded manner. The diagnostic value of DSA and ccDVA images was also evaluated using clinically relevant criteria (visibility of small [2.5 mm] and large arteries [2.5 mm], feeding arteries and tissue blush) in a paired comparison. Data were analysed by the Wilcoxon signed rank test or the binomial test, the interrater agreement was determined by the Kendall W or Fleiss Kappa analysis.DVA provided 4.11 times higher median CNR than DSA (IQR: 1.72). The visual score of DVA images (4.40 ± 0.05) was significantly higher than that of DSA (3.39 ± 0.07, p0.001). The Kendall W analysis showed moderate but significant agreement (WOur data show that DVA provides higher CNR and better image quality in PAE. This quality reserve might be used for dose management (reduction of radiation dose and contrast agent volume), and ccDVA technology has also a high potential to assist PAE interventions in the future.

Our aim was to investigate the feasibility of digital variance angiography (DVA) in lower extremity CO2 angiography and to compare the quantitative and qualitative performance of the new image processing technique with that of the current reference standard digital subtraction angiography (DSA).This prospective study enrolled 24 patients (mean age ± SD, 65.5 ± 9.2 years; 14 males, 65.1 ± 7.5 years; 10 females, 66.1 ± 11.6 years) undergoing lower-limb CO2 angiography between December 2017 and April 2018 at 2 clinical centers: The Heart and Vascular Center (HVC) of Semmelweis University, Budapest (7 patients), and the Bács-Kiskun County Hospital (BKCH) in Kecskemét (17 patients). The interventional protocol was similar at both sites, but the image acquisition instruments and protocols were different, which allowed us to investigate DVA in different settings. For comparison, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of DSA and DVA images were calculated. The visual quality of DSA and DVA images were compared by independent clinical specialists using an online questionnaire. Interrater agreement was characterized by percent agreement and Fleiss kappa. The specialists also evaluated in a random and blinded manner the individual DSA and DVA images on a 5-grade scale ranging from poor (1) to outstanding (5) image quality, and the mean ± standard error of mean (SEM) was calculated.A total of 4912 regions of interest were carefully selected in 110 image pairs to determine the SNRs. The ratio of SNRDVA/SNRDSA was calculated. At HVC, it ranged between 2.58 and 4.16 in the anatomical regions (abdominal, iliac, femoral, popliteal, crural, talar), and the overall median value was 3.53, whereas at BKCH the range was 2.71 to 4.92 and the overall median value was 4.52. During the visual evaluation, 120 DSA and DVA image pairs were compared. At HVC in 78%, although at BKCH in 90% of comparisons, it was judged that DVA provided higher quality images. The interrater agreement was 88% (P0.001) and 90% (P0.01), respectively. DVA images received consistently higher individual rating than DSA images, regardless of the research site and anatomical region. At HVC, the overall DSA and DVA scores (mean ± SEM) were 2.75 ± 0.12 and 3.23 ± 0.16, respectively (P0.05), whereas at BKCH these values were 2.49 ± 0.10 and 3.03 ± 0.09, respectively (P0.001).These data show that lower-limb CO2 angiography DVA, regardless of the image acquisition instruments and protocols, produces higher SNR and significantly better image quality than DSA; therefore this new image processing technique might help the widespread use of CO2 as a safer contrast agent in clinical practice.

Purpose The presence of metal implants may reduce angiographic image quality due to automated beam adjustments. Digital variance angiography (DVA) is reported to be superior to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) with increased contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and better image quality. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether DVA could counterbalance the image quality impairment of lower-limb angiographies with metal implants. Materials and Methods From November 2019 to January 2020, 85 raw lower-limb iodine contrast angiograms of 12 patients with metal implants were processed retrospectively with DVA analyses. For objective comparison, CNR of DSA and DVA images was calculated and the ratio CNRDVA/CNRDSA was determined. Visual image quality was evaluated in a paired comparison and by a five-grade Likert scale by three experienced radiologists. Results The CNR was calculated and compared in 1252 regions of interest in 37 image pairs containing metal implants. The median ratio of CNRDVA/CNRDSA was 1.84 with an interquartile range of 1.35–2.32. Paired comparison resulted in 84.5% in favour of DVA with an interrater agreement of 83.2% (Fleiss κ 0.454, p p Conclusion Our small-sample pilot study shows that DVA provides significantly improved image quality in lower-limb angiography with metal implants, compared to DSA imaging. The improved CNR suggest that this approach could reduce radiation exposure for lower-limb angiography with metal implants. Level of Evidence Level 4, case studies

Purpose To compare the image quality produced by kinetic imaging in x-ray angiography and the current reference standard digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Materials and Methods This prospective observational crossover study enrolled 42 patients undergoing lower limb x-ray angiography between February and June 2017 (mean age, 68.7 years; age range, 49-89 years; 32 men [mean age, 67.1 years; age range, 49-89 years] and 10 women [mean age, 75 years; age range, 57-85 years]). Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of DSA and kinetic image pairs were compared. Visual quality comparisons were also performed by specialists who used an online questionnaire. Interrater agreement was characterized by percent agreement and Fleiss k. Results A total of 1902 regions of interest were carefully selected in 110 image pairs to calculate and compare the SNRs. Median SNR in raw kinetic images was 3.3-fold and 2.3-fold higher than raw and postprocessed DSA images, respectively. A total of 232 pairs of raw and postprocessed kinetic images were compared. It was indicated that postprocessing improved the quality of kinetic images in 63.9% (2668 of 4176) of the comparisons. Interrater agreement was 75% and Fleiss k was 0.12 (P.001). Also, 238 pairs of kinetic and DSA images were compared. Kinetic imaging was judged to have provided higher quality images than DSA in 69.0% (2462 of 3570) of the comparisons. The interrater agreement was 81% and Fleiss k was 0.17 (P.001). Conclusion Kinetic imaging helps to view the same structures as digital subtraction angiography but offers better image quality. The improved signal-to-noise ratio suggests that this approach could reduce radiation exposure and improve the ability to view smaller vessels. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Poster: "ECR 2019 / C-3690 / Evaluation of kinetic imaging in carotid and cerebral X-ray angiography " by: " V. I. Orias 1, D. Szollősi2, I. Gog1, S. Nardai1, A. Szolics3, C. Csobay-Novak1, B. Nemes1, P. Sotonyi1, Z. Ruzsa4; 1Budapest/HU, 2Tarnok/HU, 3Szeged/HU, 4Kecskemet/HU"