Article

Peripheral vascular disease: comparison of continuous MR angiography and conventional MR angiography--pilot study.

Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstrasse 55, D-45122 Essen, Germany.
Radiology (Impact Factor: 6.21). 04/2007; 243(1):229-38. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2431052098
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to prospectively assess the accuracy of three-dimensional magnetic resonance (MR) angiography for evaluation of stenosis in the peripheral arterial system with a continuous moving table technique, with conventional MR angiography as reference. This study was approved by the local institutional review board; informed consent was obtained. Five healthy male volunteers (mean age, 27 years; range, 24-35 years) and four men and one woman (mean age, 63 years; range, 46-78 years) with peripheral arterial occlusive disease were examined. Images obtained with both techniques showed excellent concordance (Cohen kappa = 0.75). Images obtained with a conventional protocol had higher quality compared with those obtained with the continuous technique (mean, 1.07 +/- 0.25 [standard deviation] vs 1.58 +/- 0.6; P < .05); small vessels appeared sharper on them. For detection of significant stenosis and occlusion, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the continuous technique were 92.8%, 100%, and 89.2%, respectively.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
68 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To assess image quality and diagnostic performance of unenhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with use of flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD)-prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) of the foot arteries in patients with diabetes. Materials and Methods This prospective study was approved by institutional review board. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects. Thirty-two healthy volunteers and 38 diabetic patients who had been scheduled for lower-extremity contrast material-enhanced MR angiography were recruited to undergo unenhanced MR angiography with a 1.5-T MR unit. Image quality and diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced MR angiography in the detection of significant arterial stenosis (≥50%) were assessed by two independent reviewers. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography was used as the reference standard. The difference in the percentage of diagnostic arterial segments at unenhanced MR angiography between healthy volunteers and diabetic patients was evaluated with the McNemar test and generalized estimating equation for correlated data. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and artery-to-muscle contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of pedal arteries were measured and compared between the two MR angiography techniques by using the paired t test. Results All subjects successfully underwent unenhanced MR angiography of the foot. Unenhanced MR angiography yielded a high percentage of diagnostic arterial segments in both healthy volunteers (303 of 320 segments, 95%) and patients (341 of 370 segments, 92%), and there was no difference in the percentage between the two populations (P = .195). In patients, the average SNR and CNR at unenhanced MR angiography were higher than those at contrast-enhanced MR angiography (SNR: 90.7 ± 38.1 vs 81.7 ± 34.7, respectively, P = .023; CNR: 85.2 ± 33.2 vs 76.6 ± 33.5, respectively, P = .013). The average sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of unenhanced MR angiography were 88% (35 of 40 segments), 93% (107 of 115 segments), 81% (35 of 43 segments), 96% (107 of 112 segments), and 92% (142 of 155 segments), respectively. Interobserver agreement between the two readers for diagnostic accuracy was good (κ = 0.83). Conclusion Unenhanced MR angiography with use of FSD-prepared SSFP allows clear depiction of the foot arterial tree and accurate detection of significant arterial stenosis. The technique has the potential to be a safe and reliable screening tool for the assessment of foot arteries in diabetic patients without the use of gadolinium-based contrast material. © RSNA, 2014.
    Radiology 04/2014; · 6.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography is a reliable way to assess peripheral vascular disease. This article reviews the basic physics behind this technique and discusses our institution's experience with regard to the clinical role, recent advances in image acquisition and use of contrast agents. Problems that can affect image quality and interpretation are also highlighted.
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 04/2013; 57(2):125-40. · 0.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Optimal vessel contrast is a prerequisite for vascular imaging. Consecutive stationary imaging of multiple fields of view is contrary to the continuous contrast material passage through the vascular tree. A continuous acquisition of a magnetic resonance (MR) sequence might overcome this limitation. To investigate the image quality of a continuously moving table (CMT) acquisition compared with the established multistep approach for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) of the aorto-iliofemoral run-off. Institutional review board approved this retrospective interindividual study of 60 consecutive patients referred to CE-MRA for peripheral arterial disease. Thirty patients underwent CE-MRA using the routine multistep acquisition and 30 patients were scanned using the CMT technique at 1.5 Tesla. All patients received a fixed contrast dose of 25 mL gadoterate meglumine. A quantitative analysis was performed to assess the relative contrast of 10 vascular segments from the proximal abdominal aorta to the distal calf arteries. A qualitative evaluation of three separate vascular regions (abdomen and pelvis, thighs, and calves) was performed. Two radiologists graded independently arterial vessel conspicuity, venous contamination, presence of artifacts, and diagnostic confidence on a 4-point scale. Overall scan time, including all localizer scans, was recorded. Statistical differences were tested using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction. No significant differences were found between the continuously moving table acquisition and the multistep acquisition with regard to the relative vascular contrast and the qualitative image criteria. The agreement between both readers was significant (Kendall tau rank correlation coefficient, 0.373). The absolute reader agreement was 71.4%. The mean overall scan time was 12 min 44 s for the CMT protocol and 21 min 41 s for the multistep protocol. Aorto-iliofemoral run-off CE-MRA acquired with CMT technique provides a high image quality equivalent to a multistep technique at an overall scan time reduction of 41.3%.
    Acta Radiologica 09/2013; · 1.35 Impact Factor