Quantitative Analysis of Conebeam CT for Delineating Stents in Stent-Assisted Coil Embolization

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Kwon OK,
   3. Kim SH,
   4. Kwon BJ, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of wide-necked aneurysms by using two microcatheters: techniques and outcomes in 25 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:894–900 pmid:15814940

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. Mocco J,
   3. Snyder KV,
   4. Albuquerque FC, et al

   . Treatment of intracranial aneurysm with the Enterprise stent: a multicenter registry. J Neurosurg 2009;110:35–39 doi:10.3171/2008.7.JNS08322 pmid:18976057

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Yang X,
   3. Wu Z,
   4. Mu S, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of giant and large intracranial aneurysm using the Neuroform stent-assisted coil placement. Neurol Res 2008;30:598–602 doi:10.1179/174313208X319017 pmid:18647500

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Yavus K,
   3. Geyik S,
   4. Saatci I, et al

   . WingSpan stent system in the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysm: clinical experience with midterm follow-up results. J Neurosurg 2008;109:445–53 doi:10.3171/JNS/2008/109/9/0445 pmid:18759575

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Imamura H,
   3. Sakai N,
   4. Adachi H, et al

   . Long-term results of endovascular embolization of cerebral aneurysms. Journal of Neuroendovascular Therapy 2010;4:133–9 doi:10.5797/jnet.4.133

   CrossRef
6. 6.↵
   2. van der Bom IM,
   3. Hou SY,
   4. Puri AS, et al

   . Reduction of coil mass artifacts in high-resolution flat detector conebeam CT of cerebral stent-assisted coiling. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:2163–70 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3561 pmid:23721899

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Higashida RT,
   3. Halbach VV,
   4. Dowd CF, et al

   . Initial clinical experience with a new self-expanding nitinol stent for the treatment of intracranial cerebral aneurysms: the Cordis Enterprise stent. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:1751–56 pmid:16091525

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Tamatani S,
   3. Ito Y,
   4. Abe H, et al

   . Evaluation of the stability of aneurysms after embolization using detachable coils: correlation between stability of aneurysms and embolized volume of aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23:762–67 pmid:12006273

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Kuriyama T,
   3. Sakai N,
   4. Niida N, et al

   . Dose reduction in cone-beam CT scanning for intracranial stent deployment before coil embolization of intracranial wide-neck aneurysms. Interv Neuroradiol 2016;22:420–25 doi:10.1177/1591019916632489 pmid:26916658

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Patel NV,
    3. Gounis MJ,
    4. Wakhloo AK, et al

    . Contrast-enhanced angiographic cone-beam CT of cerebrovascular stents: experimental optimization and clinical application. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:137–44 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2239 pmid:20966059

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    2. Benndorf G,
    3. Strother CM,
    4. Claus B, et al

    . Angiographic CT in cerebrovascular stenting. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:1813–18 pmid:16091535

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Armstrong RA

    . When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2014;34:502–08 doi:10.1111/opo.12131

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Veldkamp WJ,
    3. Joemai RM,
    4. van der Molen AJ, et al

    . Development and validation of segmentation and interpolation techniques in sonograms for metal artifact suppression in CT. Med Phys 2010;37:620–28 doi:10.1118/1.3276777 pmid:20229871

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Abdoli M,
    3. De Jong JR,
    4. Pruim J, et al

    . Reduction of artefacts caused by hip implants in CT-based attenuation-corrected PET images using 2-D interpolation of a virtual sinogram on an irregular grid. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:2257–68 doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1900-3 pmid:21850499

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Zhao S,
    3. Robeltson D,
    4. Wang G, et al

    . X-ray CT metal artifact reduction using wavelets: an application for imaging total hip prostheses. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2000;19:1238–47 doi:10.1109/42.897816 pmid:11212372

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Kachelrie M,
    3. Watzke O,
    4. Kalender WA

    . Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral single-slice, multi-slice, and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2001;28:475–90 doi:10.1118/1.1358303 pmid:11339744

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    AAPM: Report No. 111: Comprehensive Methodology for the Evaluation of Radiation Dose in X-Ray Computed Tomography (2010). http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_111.pdf.html. Accessed October 15, 2017
18. 18.↵
    2. Shope T,
    3. Gagne R,
    4. Johnson G

    . A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 1981;8:488–95 doi:10.1118/1.594995 pmid:7322067

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    2. Mori S,
    3. Endo M,
    4. Nishizawa K, et al

    . Enlarged longitudinal dose profiles in cone-beam CT and the need for modified dosimetry. Med Phys 2005;32:1061–69 doi:10.1118/1.1877852 pmid:15895591

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    2. Fahrig R,
    3. Dixon RL,
    4. Payne T, et al

    . Dose and image quality for a cone-beam C-arm CT system. Med Phys 2006;33:4541–50 doi:10.1118/1.2370508 pmid:17278805

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    2. Khan AN,
    3. Shuaib W,
    4. Nikolic B, et al

    . Absorbed radiation dose in radiosensitive organs using 64- and 320-row multidetector computed tomography: a comparative study. Scientifica (Cairo) 2014;2014:305942 doi:10.1155/2014/305942 pmid:25170427

    CrossRefPubMed