Premium
Comparison of methods for instantaneous angiographic blood flow measurement
Author(s) -
Shpilfoygel Simon D.,
Jahan Reza,
Close Robert A.,
Duckwiler Gary R.,
Valentino Daniel J.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.598602
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , mathematics , blood flow , nuclear medicine , medicine , radiology
Several different algorithms have been reported for measurement of blood flow rates and velocities from digital x‐ray angiograms. We compare four videodensitometric methods: (1) distance‐density curve matching (DDCM), (2) distance‐density curve matching with curve‐fitting (DDCM‐F), (3) bolus mass tracking with curve‐fitting (BMT‐F) and (4) fluid continuity method (FCM). We tested the flow algorithms with simulated angiograms and with images obtained from a programmable flow phantom under clinically realistic flow and contrast injection conditions including imperfect mixing. All methods perform well for simulated angiograms. On phantom angiograms with constant flow, all methods tended to underestimate flow velocities by at least 7% and demonstrate high variability between consecutive measurements. The FCM demonstrated relatively low variability, but a large negative bias. The DDCM method was moderately biased and had the highest variability. The BMT‐F method demonstrated the lowest bias (−7.1%) and the lowest variability both within (27%) and between (27%) studies. No method yields reliable measurements near the peak contrast opacification, when little or no gradient of contrast is present. The extrapolating version of the BMT‐F method was also the most robust for estimation of interframe displacements longer than the field of view.