Table 1.
Pullback completeness and quality analysis
| Variable | n = 784 |
|---|---|
| Pullback completeness analysis | |
| Incomplete stent/lesion, n (%) | 58 (7.4) |
| Incomplete distal reference, n (%) | 99 (12.6) |
| Incomplete proximal reference, n (%) | 30 (3.8) |
| Incomplete region of interest (ROI), n (%) | 126 (16.1) |
| Reason for incomplete pullback | |
| Pullback started too proximal, n (%) | 79 (63.7) |
| Pullback started too distal, n (%) | 14 (11.4) |
| Inappropriate pullback length, n (%) | 21 (17.1) |
| Others, n (%) | 12 (9.5) |
| Pullback quality analysis | |
| Clear image length (CIL), mm, mean (SD) | 49.8 (13.3) |
| Clear image, % (SD) | 84.0 (18.7) |
| Clear stent length (CSL), mm, mean (SD) | 23.2 (10.0) |
| Clear stent, % (SD) | 95.8 (15.5) |
| Classification of pullback image quality | |
| Class 1: excellent quality throughout the pullback, n (%) | 284 (36.3) |
| Class 2: quality issue with the references only, n (%) | 409 (52.2) |
| 2A: minor issue affecting only the reference, n (%) | 278 (35.5) |
| 2B: moderate issue affecting only the reference, n (%) | 92 (11.7) |
| 2C: major issue affecting only the reference, n (%) | 39 (5.0) |
| Class 3: quality issue with the lesion/stented segment only, n (%) | 28 (3.6) |
| 3A: minor issue, n (%) | 6 (0.8) |
| 3B: moderate issue, n (%) | 18 (2.3) |
| 3C: major issue, n (%) | 4 (0.5) |
| Class 4: quality issue with both the lesion/stented segment and references, n (%) | 62 (7.9) |
| 4A: minor issue, n (%) | 6 (0.8) |
| 4B: moderate issue, n (%) | 25 (3.2) |
| 4C: major issue (not analyzable), n (%) | 31 (4.0) |
| Reasons affecting quality | |
| Inadequate contrast volume, n (%) | 128 (27.4) |
| Inadequate contrast flow, n (%) | 120 (25.6) |
| Catheter not flushed, n (%) | 12 (2.6) |
| Artifact (sew-up, out of screen etc.), n (%) | 113 (24.1) |
| Occlusive lesion, n (%) | 7 (1.5) |