Cargando…

How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance

BACKGROUND: Although it is well known that renal artery stenosis may cause renovascular hypertension, it is unclear how the degree of stenosis should best be measured in morphological images. The aim of this study was to determine which morphological measures from Computed Tomography Angiography (CT...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andersson, Malin, Jägervall, Karl, Eriksson, Per, Persson, Anders, Granerus, Göran, Wang, Chunliang, Smedby, Örjan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4601150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26459634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-015-0086-8
_version_ 1782394520441192448
author Andersson, Malin
Jägervall, Karl
Eriksson, Per
Persson, Anders
Granerus, Göran
Wang, Chunliang
Smedby, Örjan
author_facet Andersson, Malin
Jägervall, Karl
Eriksson, Per
Persson, Anders
Granerus, Göran
Wang, Chunliang
Smedby, Örjan
author_sort Andersson, Malin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although it is well known that renal artery stenosis may cause renovascular hypertension, it is unclear how the degree of stenosis should best be measured in morphological images. The aim of this study was to determine which morphological measures from Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) and Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) are best in predicting whether a renal artery stenosis is hemodynamically significant or not. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with hypertension and a clinical suspicion of renovascular hypertension were examined with CTA, MRA, captopril-enhanced renography (CER) and captopril test (Ctest). CTA and MRA images of the renal arteries were analyzed by two readers using interactive vessel segmentation software. The measures included minimum diameter, minimum area, diameter reduction and area reduction. In addition, two radiologists visually judged the diameter reduction without automated segmentation. The results were then compared using limits of agreement and intra-class correlation, and correlated with the results from CER combined with Ctest (which were used as standard of reference) using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 68 kidneys had all three investigations (CTA, MRA and CER + Ctest), where 11 kidneys (16.2 %) got a positive result on the CER + Ctest. The greatest area under ROC curve (AUROC) was found for the area reduction on MRA, with a value of 0.91 (95 % confidence interval 0.82–0.99), excluding accessory renal arteries. As comparison, the AUROC for the radiologists’ visual assessments on CTA and MRA were 0.90 (0.82–0.98) and 0.91 (0.83–0.99) respectively. None of the differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were found between the morphological measures in their ability to predict hemodynamically significant stenosis, but a tendency of MRA having higher AUROC than CTA. There was no significant difference between measurements made by the radiologists and measurements made with fuzzy connectedness segmentation. Further studies are required to definitely identify the optimal measurement approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4601150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46011502015-10-13 How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance Andersson, Malin Jägervall, Karl Eriksson, Per Persson, Anders Granerus, Göran Wang, Chunliang Smedby, Örjan BMC Med Imaging Research Article BACKGROUND: Although it is well known that renal artery stenosis may cause renovascular hypertension, it is unclear how the degree of stenosis should best be measured in morphological images. The aim of this study was to determine which morphological measures from Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) and Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) are best in predicting whether a renal artery stenosis is hemodynamically significant or not. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with hypertension and a clinical suspicion of renovascular hypertension were examined with CTA, MRA, captopril-enhanced renography (CER) and captopril test (Ctest). CTA and MRA images of the renal arteries were analyzed by two readers using interactive vessel segmentation software. The measures included minimum diameter, minimum area, diameter reduction and area reduction. In addition, two radiologists visually judged the diameter reduction without automated segmentation. The results were then compared using limits of agreement and intra-class correlation, and correlated with the results from CER combined with Ctest (which were used as standard of reference) using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 68 kidneys had all three investigations (CTA, MRA and CER + Ctest), where 11 kidneys (16.2 %) got a positive result on the CER + Ctest. The greatest area under ROC curve (AUROC) was found for the area reduction on MRA, with a value of 0.91 (95 % confidence interval 0.82–0.99), excluding accessory renal arteries. As comparison, the AUROC for the radiologists’ visual assessments on CTA and MRA were 0.90 (0.82–0.98) and 0.91 (0.83–0.99) respectively. None of the differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were found between the morphological measures in their ability to predict hemodynamically significant stenosis, but a tendency of MRA having higher AUROC than CTA. There was no significant difference between measurements made by the radiologists and measurements made with fuzzy connectedness segmentation. Further studies are required to definitely identify the optimal measurement approach. BioMed Central 2015-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4601150/ /pubmed/26459634 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-015-0086-8 Text en © Andersson et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Andersson, Malin
Jägervall, Karl
Eriksson, Per
Persson, Anders
Granerus, Göran
Wang, Chunliang
Smedby, Örjan
How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title_full How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title_fullStr How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title_full_unstemmed How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title_short How to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
title_sort how to measure renal artery stenosis - a retrospective comparison of morphological measurement approaches in relation to hemodynamic significance
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4601150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26459634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-015-0086-8
work_keys_str_mv AT anderssonmalin howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT jagervallkarl howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT erikssonper howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT perssonanders howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT granerusgoran howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT wangchunliang howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance
AT smedbyorjan howtomeasurerenalarterystenosisaretrospectivecomparisonofmorphologicalmeasurementapproachesinrelationtohemodynamicsignificance