The relative effect of vendor variability in CT perfusion results: A method comparison study

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 197, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 468-473

  Zussman, Benjamin M ^a   Boghosian, Garen ^a   Gorniak, Richard J ^a   Olszewski, Mark E ^b   Read, Katrina M ^b   Siddiqui, Khan M ^c   Flanders, Adam E ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Brain imaging; CT perfusion; Reproducibility; Stroke; Variability

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BRAIN BLOOD FLOW; BRAIN BLOOD VOLUME; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; ONLINE SYSTEM; OPERATOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BLOOD VOLUME; CEREBROVASCULAR CIRCULATION; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REGIONAL BLOOD FLOW; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOFTWARE; STROKE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 79960707997     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.10.6058     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Wintermark M Albers GW Alexandrov AV et al. Acute stroke imaging research roadmap. AJNR 2008 29:e23-e30
2. Hoeffner EG, Case I, Jain R, et al. Cerebral perfusion CT: technique and clinical applications. Radiology 2004; 231:632-644
3. Hopyan J, Ciarallo A, Dowlatshahi D, et al. Certainty of stroke diagnosis: incremental benefit with CT perfusion over noncontrast CT and CT angiography. Radiology 2010; 255:142-153
4. Konstas AA, Goldmakher GV, Lee TY, Lev MH. Theoretic basis and technical implementations of CT perfusion in acute ischemic stroke. Part 1. Theoretic basis. AJNR 2009; 30:662-668
5. Latchaw RE, Yonas H, Hunter GJ, et al. Guidelines and recommendations for perfusion imaging in cerebral ischemia: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals by the writing group on perfusion imaging from the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology of the American Heart Association. Stroke 2003; 34:1084-1104
6. Fiorella D, Heiserman J, Prenger E, Partovi S. Assessment of the reproducibility of postprocessing dynamic CT perfusion data. AJNR 2004; 25:97-107
7. Sanelli PC, Lev MH, Eastwood JD, Gonzalez RG, Lee TY. The effect of varying user-selected input parameters on quantitative values in CT perfusion maps. Acad Radiol 2004; 11:1085-1092
8. Sanelli PC, Nicola G, Tsiouris AJ, et al. Reproducibility of postprocessing of quantitative CT perfusion maps. AJR 2007; 188:213-218
9. Waaijer A, van der Schaaf IC, Velthuis BK, et al. Reproducibility of quantitative CT brain perfusion measurements in patients with symptomatic unilateral carotid artery stenosis. AJNR 2007; 28:927-932
10. Kudo K, Sasaki M, Yamada K, et al. Differences in CT perfusion maps generated by different commercial software: quantitative analysis by using identical source data of acute stroke patients. Radiology 2010; 254:200-209
11. Turk AS, Grayev A, Rowley HA, et al. Variability of clinical CT perfusion measurements in patients with carotid stenosis. Neuroradiology 2007; 49:955-961
12. Soares BP, Dankbaar JW, Bredno J, et al. Automated versus manual post-processing of perfusion-CT data in patients with acute cerebral ischemia: influence on interobserver variability. Neuroradiology 2009; 51:445-451
13. Wintermark M, Maeder P, Thiran JP, Schnyder P, Meuli R. Quantitative assessment of regional cerebral blood flows by perfusion CT studies at low injection rates: a critical review of the underlying theoretical models. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:1220-1230
14. Kudo K, Christensen S, Sasaki M, Ostergaard L. STIR-1 Digital Phantom Project. (abstr) Proceedings of the International Stroke Conference of the Stroke Imaging Repository (STIR). San Antonio, TX: Stroke Imaging Repository Consortium, 2010