Koirala N, McLennan G. Blood flow quantification in dialysis access using digital subtraction angiography: A retrospective study.
COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE 2020;
190:105379. [PMID:
32050137 DOI:
10.1016/j.cmpb.2020.105379]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2019] [Revised: 01/29/2020] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Vascular access is the "lifeline" of end-stage renal disease patients, which is surgically constructed to remove blood-waste and return artificially filtered blood into circulation. The arteriovenous shunting causes an abrupt change in blood flow and results in increased fluidic stress, which predisposes to access stenosis and thrombosis. While access flow is crucial to evaluate interventional endpoint, application to measure flow using digital angiogram is not yet available. The goal of this study was to determine the feasibility of flow quantification in dialysis access using a software tool and to guide the design of an imaging protocol.
METHODS
173 digital subtraction angiographic (DSA) images were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate access flow in a custom-programming environment. Four bolus transit time algorithms and a distance calculation method were assessed for flow computation. Gamma variate function was applied to remove secondary flow and intensity outliers in the bolus time-intensity curves and evaluated for enhancement in computational accuracy. The percent deviations of flow rates computed from dilution of iodinated radio-contrast material were compared with in situ catheter-based flow measurement.
RESULTS
Among the implemented bolus transit time algorithms, quantification error (mean ± standard error) of cross-correlation algorithm without and with gamma variate curve fitting was 35 ± 1% and 22 ± 1%, respectively. All other algorithms had quantification error >27%. The bias and limits of agreement of the cross-correlation algorithm with gamma variate curve fit was -94 ml/min and [-353, 165] mL/min, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The cross-correlation algorithm with gamma variate curve fit had the best accuracy and reproducibility for image-based blood flow computation. To further enhance accuracy, images may need to be acquired with a dedicated injection protocol with predetermined parameters such as the duration, rate and mode of bolus injection, and the acquisition frame rate.
Collapse