PURPOSE: To determine whether time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography (TR-MRA) with ultra-low-dose gadolinium chelate (1.5-3.0 mL) can reliably detect or rule out hemodynamically significant disease in the carotid-vertebral artery territory. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Hundred consecutive patients (62 women, 38 men, mean age = 56.6 years) underwent bothTR-MRA and standard high-resolution contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA), having been randomized to 1 of 2 groups; group A receiving a contrast dose of 1.5 mL for TR-MRA and group B receiving 3.0 mL. For scoring purposes the arterial system was divided into 21 segments. All TR-MRA and CE-MRA studies were blindly assessed by 2 radiologists for overall image quality, segmental arterial visualization, grading of arterial stenosis/occlusion, and incidence and severity of artifact. TR-MRA findings were directly compared with those of the corresponding CE-MRA examinations. RESULTS: Group A TR-MRA studies were of significantly inferior overall image quality compared with those of the corresponding CE-MRA examinations (P = 0.01 for both observers). In group B, overall image quality was similar for TR-MRA and single-phase CE-MRA examinations. On a segmental basis, a higher number of "insufficient quality" segments were identified in group A TR-MRA studies than in group B. A similar reduction in the incidence of artifacts was observed for group B relative to group A TR-MRA studies. Both groups A and B TR-MRA studies were of high specificity, negative predictive values, and accuracy (>97%). CONCLUSION:Ultra-low dose TR-MRA may be performed with 3 mL of gadolinium chelate with preservation of overall image quality and arterial segmental visualization relative to single phase CE-MRA, whereas a 1.5 mL contrast dose is associated with more suboptimal studies. Nonetheless, even at doses as low as 1.5 mL, TR-MRA can exclude arterial stenosis or occlusion.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To determine whether time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography (TR-MRA) with ultra-low-dose gadolinium chelate (1.5-3.0 mL) can reliably detect or rule out hemodynamically significant disease in the carotid-vertebral artery territory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Hundred consecutive patients (62 women, 38 men, mean age = 56.6 years) underwent both TR-MRA and standard high-resolution contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA), having been randomized to 1 of 2 groups; group A receiving a contrast dose of 1.5 mL for TR-MRA and group B receiving 3.0 mL. For scoring purposes the arterial system was divided into 21 segments. All TR-MRA and CE-MRA studies were blindly assessed by 2 radiologists for overall image quality, segmental arterial visualization, grading of arterial stenosis/occlusion, and incidence and severity of artifact. TR-MRA findings were directly compared with those of the corresponding CE-MRA examinations. RESULTS: Group A TR-MRA studies were of significantly inferior overall image quality compared with those of the corresponding CE-MRA examinations (P = 0.01 for both observers). In group B, overall image quality was similar for TR-MRA and single-phase CE-MRA examinations. On a segmental basis, a higher number of "insufficient quality" segments were identified in group A TR-MRA studies than in group B. A similar reduction in the incidence of artifacts was observed for group B relative to group A TR-MRA studies. Both groups A and B TR-MRA studies were of high specificity, negative predictive values, and accuracy (>97%). CONCLUSION: Ultra-low dose TR-MRA may be performed with 3 mL of gadolinium chelate with preservation of overall image quality and arterial segmental visualization relative to single phase CE-MRA, whereas a 1.5 mL contrast dose is associated with more suboptimal studies. Nonetheless, even at doses as low as 1.5 mL, TR-MRA can exclude arterial stenosis or occlusion.
Authors: Diego R Martin; Saravanan K Krishnamoorthy; Bobby Kalb; Khalil N Salman; Puneet Sharma; John D Carew; Phillip A Martin; Arlene B Chapman; Gaye L Ray; Christian P Larsen; Thomas C Pearson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Stephen J Riederer; Clifton R Haider; Eric A Borisch; Paul T Weavers; Phillip M Young Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jinnan Wang; Peter Börnert; Huilin Zhao; Daniel S Hippe; Xihai Zhao; Niranjan Balu; Marina S Ferguson; Thomas S Hatsukami; Jianrong Xu; Chun Yuan; William S Kerwin Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-03-22 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jens Harald Kramer; Elisabeth Arnoldi; Christopher J François; Andrew L Wentland; Konstantin Nikolaou; Bernd J Wintersperger; Thomas M Grist Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 6.016