Quantitative Evaluation of Peripheral Arterial Blood Flow Using Peri-Interventional Fluoroscopic Parameters: An In Vivo Study Evaluating Feasibility and Clinical Utility

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate various objective, quantitative, time-resolved fluoroscopic imaging parameters for use in the peri-interventional evaluation of stenotic peripheral arterial disease lesions. Material and Methods. Ten patients (median age, 64; age range, 52 to 79; 8 males, 2 females) with high-grade stenoses of either the superficial femoral or popliteal arteries who underwent endovascular treatment were included. During each intervention, two series of intraprocedural fluoroscopic images were collected, one preintervention and one postintervention. For each imaging series, four regions of interest (ROIs) were defined within the vessel lumen, with two ROIs being proximal (ROIs 1 and 2) and two being distal (ROIs 3 and 4) to the stenosis. The time-density curve (TDC) at each ROI was measured, and the resulting area under the curve (AUC), full width at half maximum (FWHM), and time-to-peak (TTP) were then calculated. RESULTS: The analysis of the TDC-derived parameters demonstrated significant differences between pre- and postinterventional flow rates in the ROI placed most distal to the stenosis, ROI 4. The AUC at ROI 4 (reported as a relative percentage of the AUC measured at ROI 1 proximal to the lesion) demonstrated a significant increase in the total flow (mean 67.84% vs. 128.68%, p=0.003). A significant reduction in FWHM at ROI 4 (mean 2.93 s vs. 1.87 s, p=0.003). A significant reduction in FWHM at ROI 4 (mean 2.93 s vs. 1.87 s, p=0.003). A significant reduction in FWHM at ROI 4 (mean 2.93 s vs. 1.87 s, CONCLUSION: AUC, FWHM, and TTP are objective, reproducible, quantifiable tools for the peri-interventional fluoroscopic evaluation of vessel stenoses. When compared to the standard subjective interpretation of fluoroscopic imagery, AUC, FWHM, and TTP offer interventionalists the advantage of having an objective, complementary method of evaluating the success of a procedure, potentially allowing for more precisely targeted and quantitatively determined treatment goals and improved patient outcomes. This retrospective study was approved by the local ethics committee under the Number 372/2018BO2. The trial was registered at the German clinical trials register under the number DRKS00017813.