PURPOSE: To compare stepping-table digital subtraction gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography of the distal aorta and lower extremity arteries with conventional catheter digital subtraction x-ray angiography in patients with arterio-occlusive disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients underwent both conventional catheter angiography and fast three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the aorta and outflow vessels at 1.5 T; the images were acquired in three consecutive imaging locations during a single infusion of a gadolinium chelate. RESULTS: Compared with catheter angiography, according to the findings of two blinded independent reviewers, MR angiography had sensitivities of 81% and 89% and specificities of 91% and 95%, respectively, for demonstration of insignificant (< or = 50%) stenosis versus significant (51%-100%) stenosis. For demonstration of occlusion, the sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 97%, respectively, by consensus. There was good interobserver correlation between the two readers overall (kappa = 0.65 for reporting the degree of narrowing in all lesions; 0.86, for reporting of insignificant versus significant stenoses; and 0.928, for reporting of occluded versus patient segments). CONCLUSION: Stepping-table digital subtraction contrast material-enhanced MR angiography has high accuracy compared with catheter angiography in patients with arterio-occlusive disease of the aorta and outflow vessels. These preliminary study results suggest that this technique may ultimately provide a safe, noninvasive, and cost-effective alternative to catheter angiography.
PURPOSE: To compare stepping-table digital subtraction gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography of the distal aorta and lower extremity arteries with conventional catheter digital subtraction x-ray angiography in patients with arterio-occlusive disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients underwent both conventional catheter angiography and fast three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the aorta and outflow vessels at 1.5 T; the images were acquired in three consecutive imaging locations during a single infusion of a gadolinium chelate. RESULTS: Compared with catheter angiography, according to the findings of two blinded independent reviewers, MR angiography had sensitivities of 81% and 89% and specificities of 91% and 95%, respectively, for demonstration of insignificant (< or = 50%) stenosis versus significant (51%-100%) stenosis. For demonstration of occlusion, the sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 97%, respectively, by consensus. There was good interobserver correlation between the two readers overall (kappa = 0.65 for reporting the degree of narrowing in all lesions; 0.86, for reporting of insignificant versus significant stenoses; and 0.928, for reporting of occluded versus patient segments). CONCLUSION: Stepping-table digital subtraction contrast material-enhanced MR angiography has high accuracy compared with catheter angiography in patients with arterio-occlusive disease of the aorta and outflow vessels. These preliminary study results suggest that this technique may ultimately provide a safe, noninvasive, and cost-effective alternative to catheter angiography.
Authors: Stefan Haneder; Ulrike I Attenberger; Philipp Riffel; Thomas Henzler; Stefan O Schoenberg; Henrik J Michaely Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-01-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Tim Leiner; Kai Yiu J A M Ho; Vincent B Ho; Georg Bongartz; Willem P T M Mali; Wenche Rasch; Jos M A van Engelshoven Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-01-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-05-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Houchun H Hu; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; David G Kruger; James F Glockner; Stephen J Riederer Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hyun J Jeong; Ty A Cashen; Michael C Hurley; Christopher Eddleman; Christopher Getch; H Hunt Batjer; Timothy J Carroll Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 4.668