Literature DB >> 17610283

Reader and platform reproducibility for quantitative assessment of carotid atherosclerotic plaque using 1.5T Siemens, Philips, and General Electric scanners.

Tobias Saam1, Thomas S Hatsukami, Vasily L Yarnykh, Cecil E Hayes, Hunter Underhill, Baocheng Chu, Norihide Takaya, Jianming Cai, William S Kerwin, Dongxiang Xu, Nayak L Polissar, B Neradilek, Wendy K Hamar, Jeffrey Maki, Dennis W Shaw, Robert J Buck, Brad Wyman, Chun Yuan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the platform and reader reproducibility of quantitative carotid plaque measurements.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 individuals with >or=15% carotid stenosis by duplex ultrasound were each imaged once by a 1.5T General Electric (GE) whole body scanner and twice by either a 1.5T Philips scanner or a 1.5T Siemens scanner. A standardized multisequence protocol and identical phased-array carotid coils were used. Expert readers, blinded to subject information, scanner type, and time point, measured the lumen, wall, and total vessel areas and determined the modified American Heart Association lesion type (AHA-LT) on the cross-sectional images.
RESULTS: AHA-LT was consistently identified across the same (kappa = 0.75) and different scan platforms (kappa = 0.75). Furthermore, scan-rescan coefficients of variation (CV) of wall area measurements on Siemens and Philips scanners ranged from 6.3% to 7.5%. However, wall area measurements differed between Philips and GE (P = 0.003) and between Siemens and GE (P = 0.05). In general, intrareader reproducibility was higher than interreader reproducibility for AHA-LT identification as well as for quantitative measurements.
CONCLUSION: All three scanners produced images that allowed AHA-LT to be consistently identified. Reproducibility of quantitative measurements by Siemens and Philips scanners were comparable to previous studies using 1.5T GE scanners. However, bias was introduced with each scanner and the use of different readers substantially increased variability. We therefore recommend using the same platform and the same reader for scans of individual subjects undergoing serial assessment of carotid atherosclerosis. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17610283     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  25 in total

1.  Scan-Rescan reproducibility of carotid bifurcation geometry from routine contrast-enhanced MR angiography.

Authors:  Payam B Bijari; Luca Antiga; Bruce A Wasserman; David A Steinman
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Discriminating carotid atherosclerotic lesion severity by luminal stenosis and plaque burden: a comparison utilizing high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla.

Authors:  Xihai Zhao; Hunter R Underhill; Qian Zhao; Jianming Cai; Feiyu Li; Minako Oikawa; Li Dong; Hideki Ota; Thomas S Hatsukami; Baocheng Chu; Chun Yuan
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  Carotid artery atherosclerosis: effect of intensive lipid therapy on the vasa vasorum--evaluation by using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Li Dong; Williams S Kerwin; Huijun Chen; Baocheng Chu; Hunter R Underhill; Moni Blazej Neradilek; Thomas S Hatsukami; Chun Yuan; Xue-Qiao Zhao
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Prediction of high-risk plaque development and plaque progression with the carotid atherosclerosis score.

Authors:  Dongxiang Xu; Daniel S Hippe; Hunter R Underhill; Minako Oikawa-Wakayama; Li Dong; Kiyofumi Yamada; Chun Yuan; Thomas S Hatsukami
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-03-13

5.  Reproducibility of black blood dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in aortic plaques of atherosclerotic rabbits.

Authors:  Claudia Calcagno; Esad Vucic; Venkatesh Mani; Gregg Goldschlager; Zahi A Fayad
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Predictors of surface disruption with MR imaging in asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  H R Underhill; C Yuan; V L Yarnykh; B Chu; M Oikawa; L Dong; N L Polissar; G A Garden; S C Cramer; T S Hatsukami
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Variations in atherosclerosis and remodeling patterns in aorta and carotids.

Authors:  Katsumi Hayashi; Venkatesh Mani; Ajay Nemade; Silvia Aguiar; John E Postley; Valentin Fuster; Zahi A Fayad
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2010-03-05       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance parameters of atherosclerotic plaque burden improve discrimination of prior major adverse cardiovascular events.

Authors:  Venkatesh Mani; Paul Muntner; Samuel S Gidding; Silvia H Aguiar; Hamza El Aidi; Karen B Weinshelbaum; Hiroaki Taniguchi; Rob van der Geest; Johan H C Reiber; Sameer Bansilal; Michael Farkouh; Valentin Fuster; John E Postley; Mark Woodward; Zahi A Fayad
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 5.364

9.  High resolution carotid black-blood 3T MR with parallel imaging and dedicated 4-channel surface coils.

Authors:  Tobias Saam; Jose G Raya; Clemens C Cyran; Katja Bochmann; Georgios Meimarakis; Olaf Dietrich; Dirk A Clevert; Ute Frey; Chun Yuan; Thomas S Hatsukami; Abe Werf; Maximilian F Reiser; Konstantin Nikolaou
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 10.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in carotid atherosclerotic disease.

Authors:  Li Dong; William S Kerwin; Marina S Ferguson; Rui Li; Jinnan Wang; Huijun Chen; Gador Canton; Thomas S Hatsukami; Chun Yuan
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 5.364

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.