Comparison of 1- and 2-marker techniques for calculating system magnification factor for angiographic measurement of intracranial vessels

J Neuroimaging. 2005 Oct;15(4):356-61. doi: 10.1177/1051228405280175.


Background and purpose: Accurate estimation of an intracranial vessel size is crucial during a diagnostic or therapeutic angiography procedure. The use of 1 or 2 external markers of known size is previously proposed to manually estimate the magnification factor (MF) of an intracranial vessel. The authors evaluated the use of different external marker techniques commonly used during angiographic measurements.

Methods: Forty-three intracranial vessels in 17 patients were measured using 1-and 2-marker techniques. To obtain the MF, 2 metallic markers were attached to the frontal-temporal regions. The MFs for the targeted vessels were obtained from the x-ray films by measuring the image sizes of the markers and their positions with respect to the target vessel.

Results: Using a phantom, the errors resulted from (a) linear interpolation of MFs, (b) linear interpolation of inverse MFs, and (c) using the MFs of 1 marker, which were 1.23% to 2.23%, 0.8% to 1.55%, and 3.85% to 14.62%, respectively. A similar trend was observed for the measurement of cerebral arteries.

Conclusion: The use of 2 markers can result in a more accurate estimation of the vessel size. The use of only 1 external marker can lead to substantial error based on the location of the target vessel. Optimizing image acquisition is also crucial for accurate determination of vessel size.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Cerebral Angiography / methods*
  • Cerebral Arteries / anatomy & histology*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Phantoms, Imaging