Adaptive approach to accurate analysis of small-diameter vessels in cineangiograms

In coronary vessels smaller than 1 mm in diameter, it is difficult to accurately identify lumen borders using existing border detection techniques. Computer-detected diameters of small coronary vessels are often severely overestimated due to the influence of the imaging system point spread function and the use of an edge operator designed for a broad range of diameter vessel sizes. Computer-detected diameters may be corrected if a calibration curve for the X-ray system is available. Unfortunately, the performance of this postprocessing diameter correction approach is severely limited by the presence of image noise. The authors report here a new approach that uses a two-stage adaption of edge operator parameters to optimally match the edge operator to the local lumen diameter. In the first stage, approximate lumen diameters are detected using a single edge operator in a half-resolution image. Depending on the approximate lumen size, one of three edge operators is selected for the second full-resolution stage in which left and right coronary borders are simultaneously identified. The method was tested in a set of 72 segments of nine angiographic phantom vessels with diameters ranging from 0.46 to 4.14 mm and in 82 clinical coronary angiograms. Performance of the adaptive simultaneous border detection method was compared to that of a conventional border detection method and to that of a postprocessing diameter correction border detection method. Adaptive border detection yielded significantly improved accuracy in small phantom vessels and across all vessel sizes in comparison to the conventional and postprocessing diameter correction methods (p<0.001 in all cases). Adaptive simultaneous coronary border detection provides both accurate and robust quantitative analysis of coronary vessels of all sizes.

[1]  S. Ellis,et al.  Optimal detection of the progression of coronary artery disease: comparison of methods suitable for risk factor intervention trials. , 1986, Circulation.

[2]  Christoph A. Nienaber,et al.  On-line independent digital stenosis morphometry avoids self referral bias for interventional coronary therapy , 1995, Computers in Cardiology 1995.

[3]  C J Slager,et al.  Comparative validation of quantitative coronary angiography systems. Results and implications from a multicenter study using a standardized approach. , 1995, Circulation.

[4]  Milan Sonka,et al.  Adaptive simultaneous coronary border detection: a method for accurate analysis of small diameter vessels , 1993, Proceedings of Computers in Cardiology Conference.

[5]  D. Skorton,et al.  Cardiac Imaging and Image Processing , 1985 .

[6]  Johan H. C. Reiber,et al.  An overview of coronary quantitation techniques as of 1989 , 1991 .

[7]  Jan J. Gerbrands,et al.  Computer assisted analysis of the severity of obstructions from coronary cineangiograms: a methodological review , 1984 .

[8]  M. LeFree,et al.  Automated quantitative coronary arteriography: morphologic and physiologic validation in vivo of a rapid digital angiographic method. , 1987, Circulation.

[9]  S. Paulin,et al.  Computerized image analysis for quantitative measurement of vessel diameter from cineangiograms. , 1983, Circulation.

[10]  A. Ross,et al.  Interpretation of coronary angiograms. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  S. M. Collins,et al.  Visual estimates of percent diameter coronary stenosis: "a battered gold standard". , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  石井 康宏,et al.  (119)定量的冠動脈造影(quantitative coronary angiography, QCA)の経時的再現性に関する検討(学位論文内容の要旨および審査の結果の要旨第36集) , 1997 .

[13]  N. Kleiman,et al.  Comparison of quantitative coronary angiography to visual estimates of lesion severity pre and post PTCA. , 1990, American heart journal.

[14]  M. Stadius,et al.  Coronary artery revascularization. Critical need for, and consequences of, objective angiographic assessment of lesion severity. , 1990, Circulation.

[15]  David Keane,et al.  Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Interventional Cardiology , 1994 .

[16]  Thomas Linderer,et al.  Edge detection in quantitative coronary arteriography (QCA): the impact of image zoom on edge positioning, accuracy, precision and discrimination , 1992, Proceedings Computers in Cardiology.

[17]  B. Kimball,et al.  Systematic bias in the reporting of angioplasty outcomes: accuracy of visual estimates of absolute lumen diameters. , 1994, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[18]  Milan Sonka,et al.  Robust simultaneous detection of coronary borders in complex images , 1995, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[19]  K. Gould,et al.  AUTOMATED EVALUATION OF VESSEL DIAMETER FROM ARTERIOGRAMS. , 1983 .

[20]  J A Berry,et al.  Evaluation of a personal computer-based quantitative coronary analysis system for rapid assessment of coronary stenoses. , 1992, American heart journal.

[21]  E. Bolson,et al.  Quantitative Coronary Arteriography: Estimation of Dimensions, Hemodynamic Resistance, and Atheroma Mass of Coronary Artery Lesions Using the Arteriogram and Digital Computation , 1977, Circulation.

[22]  J. Murray,et al.  Variability in the Analysis of Coronary Arteriograms , 1977, Circulation.

[23]  K. Gould,et al.  Patterns in visual interpretation of coronary arteriograms as detected by quantitative coronary arteriography. , 1991, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[24]  R. Dinsmore,et al.  Interobserver Variability in Coronary Angiography , 1976, Circulation.

[25]  Milan Sonka,et al.  Simultaneous detection of both coronary borders , 1993, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[26]  G. Mancini,et al.  Quantitative coronary angiography , 1994 .

[27]  P. Eichel,et al.  A method for a fully automatic definition of coronary arterial edges from cineangiograms. , 1988, IEEE transactions on medical imaging.

[28]  Milan Sonka,et al.  Image Processing, Analysis and Machine Vision , 1993, Springer US.

[29]  R. Vogel,et al.  Accuracy of individual and panel visual interpretations of coronary arteriograms: implications for clinical decisions. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  T. Takaro,et al.  Observer Agreement in Evaluating Coronary Angiograms , 1975, Circulation.

[31]  S E Nissen,et al.  Influence of operator- and patient-dependent variables on the suitability of automated quantitative coronary arteriography for routine clinical use. , 1992, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[32]  M Siebes,et al.  Sources of error in quantitative coronary angiography. , 1993, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[33]  W. Desmet,et al.  In vivo comparison of different quantitative edge detection systems used for measuring coronary arterial diameters. , 1995, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[34]  S. M. Collins,et al.  Automated analysis of coronary arterial morphology in cineangiograms: geometric and physiologic validation in humans. , 1989, IEEE transactions on medical imaging.