Total occlusion versus hairline residual lumen of the internal carotid arteries: accuracy of single section helical CT angiography.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Routine carotid sonography and MR angiography cannot reliably detect the markedly reduced flow velocities associated with very severe carotid stenosis. In this study, we sought to evaluate the accuracy of single row detector helical CT angiography in distinguishing hairline residual lumen from total occlusion of severely stenosed internal carotid arteries (ICAs). METHODS: From our departmental data base of single row detector CT angiography studies performed for evaluation of ICA occlusive disease, 21 cases were identified with evidence of either hairline residual lumen or total occlusion on correlative conventional catheter radiographic arteriograms; these included seven cases of proved hairline residual lumen and 14 cases of proved total occlusion. Two neuroradiologists, blinded to the radiographic arteriography results, graded the diseased ICA on each CT angiogram as definitely occluded, probably occluded, indeterminate, probably patent, or definitely patent. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated for each neuroradiologist. RESULTS: At an operating point on the receiver operating characteristic curve corresponding to 90% sensitivity, the first reader achieved 95% specificity and the second reader achieved 80% specificity for distinguishing hairline residual lumen from total occlusion. Absolute accuracy rates were 95% and 85%, respectively. No significant difference in accuracy was observed between the two readers (P =.28, two-tailed t test). CONCLUSION: Single row detector CT angiography can distinguish total ICA occlusion from hairline residual lumen with a high degree of accuracy. In equivocal cases, conventional catheter arteriography may be desirable to confirm the diagnosis.

Coregistration of head CT comparison studies: assessment of clinical utility.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The authors evaluated the clinical utility of image coregistration in the interpretation of follow-up computed tomographic (CT) studies of the head. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients with 34 intracranial lesions underwent follow-up head CT. The images were coregistered automatically with proprietary software on a standard personal computer, and all patient demographic data were removed. A neuroradiologist read the coregistered images several days after first reading the nonregistered images. The reading was repeated some months later to assess intraobserver variability, and a second reader was recruited so that interobserver variability also could be assessed. The interpretations of nonregistered images served as controls for the interpretations of coregistered images. Readers were asked to assess changes in lesion size quantitatively and to record the time it took to evaluate each case. Differences in interpretation speed were evaluated with the t test. Univariate analysis was used to measure accuracy; interpretations were compared with those of a nonblinded senior neuroradiologist, which served as the diagnostic standard. Intra- and interindividual variability were assessed with the kappa statistic. RESULTS: The time needed to read the studies decreased by an average of 65.6% (P < .05), with statistically significant reductions for each reader. Coregistration also changed the interpretation results in 21.9% of cases. Coregistration increased the accuracy of reading, but not significantly. Intraobserver variability improved from 0.3554 to 0.7328 with coregistration, and interobserver variability improved from 0.2670 to 0.3309. CONCLUSION: Image coregistration is technically feasible and accurate. Coregistration of follow-up studies significantly reduces the time needed for comparison and interpretation. It does not detract from the accuracy of interpretation of follow-up studies and tends to decrease intra- and interobserver variability.