{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013314646110721794, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005606166783461808, 'mean_word_length': 5.832535885167464, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Pre- and post-interventional follow-up of stent graphs with single and multi-slice spiral computerized tomography].

PURPOSE
Could contrast enhanced computed tomography replace conventional catheter angiography in the preoperative evaluation of aortic aneurysms before stentgraft implantation? Does multi slice computed tomography have advantages comparing to single slice computed tomography?


METHODS
We compared 15 single slice with 13 multi slice computed tomography studies and reconstructions according to there ability to replace conventional catheter angiography in the preoperative evaluation. In the postoperative follow-up 60 single slice computed tomography studies were compared to 60 multi slice studies.


RESULTS
By using appropriate reconstructions the spiral computed tomography studies could deliver all information necessary for implantation. In our study no advantage of multi slice computed tomography could be detected. In the postoperative evaluation of stentgrafts our computed tomography scan protocol could detect all relevant complications in single and multi slice computed tomography. No significant advantage of multi slice computed tomography could be detected.


CONCLUSION
Contrast enhanced computed tomography is equal to conventional catheter angiography in the pre- and postoperative evaluation of stengrafts. No significant advantage of multi slice versus single slice could be detected.