BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare diagnostic performance and reproducibility of 3 different methods of quantifying stenosis on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CEMRA), with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. METHODS:167 symptomatic patients scheduled for DSA, after screening Doppler ultrasound, were prospectively recruited to undergo CEMRA. Severity of stenosis was measured according to the North American Symptomatic Trial Collaborators (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST), and the common carotid (CC) methods. Measurements for each method were made for 284 vessels (142 included patients) on bothCEMRA and DSA in a blinded and randomized manner by 3 independent attending neuroradiologists. RESULTS: Significant differences in prevalence of severe stenosis were seen with the 3 methods on both DSA and CEMRA, with ECST yielding the least and NASCET the most cases of severe stenosis. Overall, all 3 methods performed similarly well in terms of intermodality correlation and agreement. No significant differences in interobserver agreement were found on either modality. With CEMRA, however, we found a significantly lower sensitivity for detection of severe stenosis with ECST (79.8%) compared with NASCET (93.0%), with DSA as reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: Uniformity of carotid stenosis measurement methods is desirable because patient management may otherwise differ substantially. All 3 methods are adequate for use with DSA. With CEMRA, however, this study supports use of the NASCET method because of improved sensitivity for detecting severe stenosis.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare diagnostic performance and reproducibility of 3 different methods of quantifying stenosis on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CEMRA), with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. METHODS: 167 symptomatic patients scheduled for DSA, after screening Doppler ultrasound, were prospectively recruited to undergo CEMRA. Severity of stenosis was measured according to the North American Symptomatic Trial Collaborators (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST), and the common carotid (CC) methods. Measurements for each method were made for 284 vessels (142 included patients) on both CEMRA and DSA in a blinded and randomized manner by 3 independent attending neuroradiologists. RESULTS: Significant differences in prevalence of severe stenosis were seen with the 3 methods on both DSA and CEMRA, with ECST yielding the least and NASCET the most cases of severe stenosis. Overall, all 3 methods performed similarly well in terms of intermodality correlation and agreement. No significant differences in interobserver agreement were found on either modality. With CEMRA, however, we found a significantly lower sensitivity for detection of severe stenosis with ECST (79.8%) compared with NASCET (93.0%), with DSA as reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: Uniformity of carotid stenosis measurement methods is desirable because patient management may otherwise differ substantially. All 3 methods are adequate for use with DSA. With CEMRA, however, this study supports use of the NASCET method because of improved sensitivity for detecting severe stenosis.
Authors: Chris Pavlovic; Hideki Futamatsu; Dominick J Angiolillo; Luis A Guzman; Norbert Wilke; Daniel Siragusa; Peter Wludyka; Robert Percy; Martin Northrup; Theodore A Bass; Marco A Costa Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2006-07-27 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: A S Turk; K M Johnson; D Lum; D Niemann; B Aagaard-Kienitz; D Consigny; J Grinde; P Turski; V Haughton; C Mistretta Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Hongge Shu; Jie Sun; Thomas S Hatsukami; Niranjan Balu; Daniel S Hippe; Haining Liu; Ted R Kohler; Wenzhen Zhu; Chun Yuan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 4.813