Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of In-Stent Restenosis After Stent Implantation in the Vertebral Artery Ostium by Multislice Computed Tomography Angiography: Factors Affecting Accurate Diagnosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Few articles have evaluated vertebral artery ostium stents using multislice computed tomography (CT). The purpose of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 64- and 16-slice CT for detecting significant in-stent restenosis after vertebral artery ostium stenting, and to identify factors affecting the accurate diagnosis by CT.

Methods

We reviewed 57 stents scanned using 64-slice CT and 34 stents using 16-slice CT. The accuracy of CT for diagnosing significant in-stent restenosis (≥ 50 % diameter narrowing) was calculated using conventional angiography as a reference standard. Possible factors influencing the diagnostic performance of CT were analyzed, such as CT scanner, image quality, and stent characteristics.

Results

With 64-slice CT, 46 (80.7 %) of 57 stents were classified as evaluable, while with 16-slice CT, 28 (82.3 %) of 34 stents were classified as evaluable. No stents with diameters ≤ 2.75 mm were evaluable. The respective results for 64- versus 16-slice CT were sensitivity 87.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 47.3–99.7 %) versus 100 % (95 % CI 15.8–100.0 %), specificity 94.7 % (95 % CI 82.3 %–99.4 %) versus 96.2 % (95 % CI 80.4–99.9 %). Factors reducing the accurate diagnosis were those associated with poor image quality, a diameter ≤ 2.75 mm, and drug-eluting stent type (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

64-slice and 16-slice CT scans are adequate in stents with diameters > 2.75 mm for the evaluation of in-stent restenosis after stent implantation in the vertebral artery ostium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Koroshetz WJ, Ropper AH. Artery-to-artery embolism causing stroke in the posterior circulation. Neurology. 1987;37:292.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Coward LJ, McCabe DJ, Ederle J, Featherstone RL, Clifton A, Brown MM. Long-term outcome after angioplasty and stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis compared with medical treatment in the carotid and vertebral artery transluminal angioplasty study (CAVATAS) a randomized trial. Stroke. 2007;38:1526–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chastain HD, Campbell MS, Iyer S, Roubin GS, Vitek J, Mathur A, et al. Extracranial vertebral artery stent placement: in-hospital and follow-up results. J neurosurg. 1999;91:547–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lin YH, Juang JM, Jeng JS, Yip PK, Kao HL. Symptomatic ostial vertebral artery stenosis treated with tubular coronary stents: clinical results and restenosis analysis. J Endovasc Ther. 2004;11:719–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. SSYLVIA Study Investigators. Stenting of symptomatic atherosclerotic lesions in the vertebral or intracranial arteries (SSYLVIA): study results. Stroke. 2004;35:1388–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Holmes DR Jr, Leon MB, Moses JW, Popma JJ, Cutlip D, Fitzgerald PJ, et al. Analysis of 1-year clinical outcomes in the SIRIUS trial a randomized trial of a sirolimus-eluting stent versus a standard stent in patients at high risk for coronary restenosis. Circulation. 2004;109:634–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Morice MC, Colombo A, Meier B, Serruys P, Tamburino C, Guagliumi G, et al. Sirolimus-vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions. JAMA. 2006;295:895–904.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stayman AN, Nogueira RG, Gupta R. A systematic review of stenting and angioplasty of symptomatic extracranial vertebral artery stenosis. Stroke. 2011;42:2212–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Willinsky RA, Taylor SM, Farb RI, Tomlinson G, Montanera W. Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography: prospective analysis of 2,899 procedures and review of the literature. Radiology. 2003;227:522–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maintz D, Botnar RM, Fischbach R, Heindel W, Manning WJ, Stuber M. Coronary magnetic resonance angiography for assessment of the stent lumen: a phantom study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2002;4:359–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sun Z, Almutairi AMD. Diagnostic accuracy of 64 multislice CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73:266–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sun Z, Davidson R, Lin CH. Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol. 2009;69:489–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kitagawa T, Fujii T, Tomohiro Y, Maeda K, Kobayashi M, Kunita E, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stents in patients by 16-slice computed tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2006;109:188–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilard M, Cornily J-C, Pennec P-Y, Le Gal G, Nonent M, Mansourati J, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stents by 16 slice computed tomography. Heart. 2006;92:58–61.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Watanabe M, Uemura S, Iwama H, Okayama S, Takeda Y, Kawata H, et al. Usefulness of 16-slice multislice computed tomography for follow-up study of coronary stent implantation. Circ J. 2006;70:691–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Seifarth H, Özgün M, Raupach R, Flohr T, Heindel W, Fischbach R, et al. 64-versus 16-slice CT angiography for coronary artery stent assessment: in vitro experience. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:22–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R, Flohr T, Rink M, Sommer T, et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:818–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Maintz D, Seifarth H, Flohr T, Krämer S, Wichter T, Heindel W, et al. Improved coronary artery stent visualization and in-stent stenosis detection using 16-slice computed-tomography and dedicated image reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:790–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Maintz D, Grude M, Fallenberg E, Heindel W, Fischbach R. Assessment of coronary arterial stents by multislice-CT angiography. Acta Radiol. 2003;44:597–603.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiography—initial experience. Radiology. 2007;242:403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. J. Yoo MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, Y., Lim, Y., Lim, H. et al. Evaluation of In-Stent Restenosis After Stent Implantation in the Vertebral Artery Ostium by Multislice Computed Tomography Angiography: Factors Affecting Accurate Diagnosis. Clin Neuroradiol 25, 379–386 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00062-014-0315-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00062-014-0315-5

Keywords

Navigation