OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal scan timing for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and to evaluate a new timing method based on the arteriovenous circulation time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-nine contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiographic examinations were performed mainly in the extremities. A 1.5T scanner with a 3-D turbo-FLASH sequence was used, and during each study, two consecutive arterial phases and one venous phase were acquired. Scan delay time was calculated from the time-intensity curve by the traditional (n = 48) and/or the new (n = 41) method. This latter was based on arteriovenous circulation time rather than peak arterial enhancement time, as used in the traditional method. The numbers of first-phase images showing a properly enhanced arterial phase were compared between the two methods. RESULTS: Mean scan delay time was 5.4 sec longer with the new method than with the traditional. Properly enhanced first-phase images were found in 65% of cases (31/48) using the traditional timing method, and 95% (39/41) using the new method. When cases in which there was mismatch between the target vessel and the time-intensity curve acquisition site are excluded, erroneous acquisition occurred in seven cases with the traditional method, but in none with the new method. CONCLUSION: The calculation of scan delay time on the basis of arteriovenous circulation time provides better timing for arterial phase acquisition than the traditional method.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal scan timing for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and to evaluate a new timing method based on the arteriovenous circulation time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-nine contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiographic examinations were performed mainly in the extremities. A 1.5T scanner with a 3-D turbo-FLASH sequence was used, and during each study, two consecutive arterial phases and one venous phase were acquired. Scan delay time was calculated from the time-intensity curve by the traditional (n = 48) and/or the new (n = 41) method. This latter was based on arteriovenous circulation time rather than peak arterial enhancement time, as used in the traditional method. The numbers of first-phase images showing a properly enhanced arterial phase were compared between the two methods. RESULTS: Mean scan delay time was 5.4 sec longer with the new method than with the traditional. Properly enhanced first-phase images were found in 65% of cases (31/48) using the traditional timing method, and 95% (39/41) using the new method. When cases in which there was mismatch between the target vessel and the time-intensity curve acquisition site are excluded, erroneous acquisition occurred in seven cases with the traditional method, but in none with the new method. CONCLUSION: The calculation of scan delay time on the basis of arteriovenous circulation time provides better timing for arterial phase acquisition than the traditional method.
Authors: J J Snidow; M S Johnson; V J Harris; P M Margosian; A M Aisen; S G Lalka; D F Cikrit; S O Trerotola Journal: Radiology Date: 1996-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: M R Prince; D L Narasimham; J C Stanley; T L Chenevert; D M Williams; M V Marx; K J Cho Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P Pavone; S Giuliani; G Cardone; R Occhiato; P Di Renzi; G A Petroni; C Buoni; R Passariello Journal: Radiology Date: 1991-06 Impact factor: 11.105