Limitations of Quantitative Blush Evaluator (QuBE) as myocardial perfusion assessment method on digital coronary angiograms
Background and Aim: Quantitative Blush Evaluator (QuBE) is a software application that allows quantifying myocardial perfusion in coronary angiograms after a percutaneous coronary intervention. QuBE has some limitations such as the application of a crude filter to remove large scale structures and the absence of correction for cardiac motion. This study investigates the extent of these limitations and we hypothesize that enhanced image analysis methods can provide improvements.
Methods: We calculated QuBE scores of 117 patients from the HEBE Trial and determined its association with the Myocardial Blush Grade (MBG) score. Accuracy of large-structure removal is qualitatively assessed for various sizes of a median filter. The influence of cardiac motion was evaluated by comparing the blush curve and QuBE score of the native QuBE with manually motion-corrected QuBE for 40 patients. The effect of different kernel sizes and motion correction to a potential improvement of the association between QuBE score and MBG was studied.
Results: In our population, there was no significant association between QuBE score and MBG (p = 0.14). Median filters of various kernel sizes were unable to remove large structure related noise. Variations in filters and cardiac movement correction did not result in an improvement in the association with MBG scores (observer 1: p = 0.66; observer 2: p = 0.72).
Conclusions: There was no significant association of QuBE with MBG scores in our population, which suggests that QuBE is not suitable for a quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion. Alternative kernel sizes for the large structure removal filter and cardiac motion correction did not improve QuBE performance.
Relevance for patients: Further improvements of QuBE to overcome its inherent limitations are necessary in order to establish QuBE as a reliable myocardial perfusion assessment method.
[1] Henriques JPS, Zijlstra F, van ’t Hof AWJ, et al. Angiographic assessment of reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction by myocardial blush grade. Circulation. 2003;107:2115-2119.
[2]Gibson CM, Cannon CP, Murphy SA, et al. Relationship of TIMI myocardial perfusion grade to mortality after administration of thrombolytic drugs. Circulation. 2000;101:125-130.
[3]Wagner A, Mahrholdt H, Holly TA, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI and routine single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging for detection of subendocardial myocardial infarcts: 2003;361:374-379.
[4] an imaging study. Lancet. Bratis K, Mahmoud I, Chiribiri A, Nagel E. Quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging by cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2013;20:860-870.
[5]Pelgrim GJ, Handayani A, Dijkstra H, et al. Quantitative myocardial perfusion with dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging in MRI and CT: Theoretical models and current implementation. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:1-12.
[6]Vogelzang M, Vlaar PJ, Svilaas T, Amo D, Nijsten MWN, Zijlstra F. Computer-assisted myocardial blush quantification after percutaneous coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: A substudy from the TAPAS trial. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:594-599
[7] Gu YL, Haeck JDE, Vogelzang M, et al. Computer-assisted quantification of myocardial reperfusion after primary percutaneous coronary intervention predicts functional and contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;77:174-181
[8] Haeck JDE, Gu YL, Vogelzang M, et al. Feasibility and applicability of computer-assisted myocardial blush quantification after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;75:701-706.
[9] Porto I, Hamilton-Craig C, De Maria GL, et al. Quantitative Blush Evaluator accurately quantifies microvascular dysfunction in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Am Heart J. 2011;162:372-381.e2.
[10]Hirsch A, Nijveldt R, van der Vleuten P a, et al. Intracoronary infusion of mononuclear cells from bone marrow or peripheral blood compared with standard therapy in patients after acute myocardial infarction treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the randomized controlled HEBE. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1736-1747.
[11]Huang T, Yang G, Tang G. A fast two-dimensional median filtering algorithm. IEEE Trans Acoust. 1979;27:13-18.
[12]van 't Hof AWJ, Liem A, Suryapranata H, Hoorntje JC a., de Boer M-J, Zijlstra F. Angiographic assessment of myocardial reperfusion in patients treated with primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: myocardial blush grade. Circulation. 1998; 97: 2302-2306.
[13]Korosoglou G, Haars A, Michael G, et al. Quantitative evaluationevaluation of myocardial blush to assess tissue level reperfusion in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Incremental prognostic value compared with visual assessment. Am Heart J.2007;153:612-620.
[14]okkema ML, Vlaar PJ, Vogelzang M, et al. Effect of high dose intracoronary adenosine administration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction a randomized controlled trial. Circ Interv. 2009;2:323-329.
[15]F Gu YL, Kampinga MA, Wieringa WG, et al. Intracoronary versus intravenous administration of abciximab in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with thrombus aspiration the comparison of intracoronary versus intravenous abciximab administration during emergency reperfusion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (CICERO) trial. Circulation. 2010; 122: 2709-2717.
[16]Yamamoto M, Okura Y, Ishihara M, Kagemoto M, Harada K, Ishida T. Development of digital subtraction angiography for coronary artery. J Digit Imaging. 2009; 22: 319-325.
[17] Frangi AF, Niessen WJ, Vincken KL, Viergever M a. Multiscale vessel enhancement filtering. Medial Image Comput Comput Invervention - MICCAI’98 Lect Notes Comput Sci vol 1496. 1998;1496:130-137.