OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic value of non-contrast-enhanced, 3D-high-resolution, ECG-gated, multi-step MR angiography (non-ceMRA) of the lower extremities using a modified turbo-spin-echo technique in comparison to 1.0-molar contrast-enhanced MR angiography (ceMRA) in patients with suspected peripheral vascular disease (PVD). METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients underwent non-ceMRA before ceMRA within the same session. We assessed examination time, image quality, localisation and severity of stenosis. RESULTS: Examination time was shorter for ceMRA (12 ± 4 min) compared with non-ceMRA (28 ± 6 min, p < 0.001). The image quality of the aorta-iliac, femoral and combined popliteal and lower leg arteries was inferior for non-ceMRA (2.8 ± 0.8/3.3 ± 0.8/3.3 ± 0.9) versus ceMRA (4.7 ± 0.8/4.8 ± 0.6/4.8 ± 0.7) on a 5-point scale with 5 for maximum quality (p < 0.01). CeMRA offered more assessable data sets than non-ceMRA (98% vs. 90%). For detecting stenosis >50% or occlusions of pelvic and femoral arteries using non-ceMRA the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 94%, 86%, 67% and 98% and for popliteal and lower leg arteries 93%, 87%, 69% and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that 3D non-ceMRA represents a very promising technique in patients with lower extremities PVD and could be used as an alternative if gadolinium-based contrast agents cannot be administered.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic value of non-contrast-enhanced, 3D-high-resolution, ECG-gated, multi-step MR angiography (non-ceMRA) of the lower extremities using a modified turbo-spin-echo technique in comparison to 1.0-molar contrast-enhanced MR angiography (ceMRA) in patients with suspected peripheral vascular disease (PVD). METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients underwent non-ceMRA before ceMRA within the same session. We assessed examination time, image quality, localisation and severity of stenosis. RESULTS: Examination time was shorter for ceMRA (12 ± 4 min) compared with non-ceMRA (28 ± 6 min, p < 0.001). The image quality of the aorta-iliac, femoral and combined popliteal and lower leg arteries was inferior for non-ceMRA (2.8 ± 0.8/3.3 ± 0.8/3.3 ± 0.9) versus ceMRA (4.7 ± 0.8/4.8 ± 0.6/4.8 ± 0.7) on a 5-point scale with 5 for maximum quality (p < 0.01). CeMRA offered more assessable data sets than non-ceMRA (98% vs. 90%). For detecting stenosis >50% or occlusions of pelvic and femoral arteries using non-ceMRA the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 94%, 86%, 67% and 98% and for popliteal and lower leg arteries 93%, 87%, 69% and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that 3D non-ceMRA represents a very promising technique in patients with lower extremities PVD and could be used as an alternative if gadolinium-based contrast agents cannot be administered.
Authors: Rolf W Huegli; Markus Aschwanden; Georg Bongartz; Kurt Jaeger; Hans-Georg Heidecker; Christoph Thalhammer; Anja-Carina Schulte; Claus Hashagen; Augustinus L Jacob; Deniz Bilecen Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-04-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Annette Hentsch; Manuela A Aschauer; Jörn O Balzer; Joachim Brossmann; Hans P Busch; Kirsten Davis; Philippe Douek; Franz Ebner; Jos M A van Engelshoven; Michaela Gregor; Christian Kersting; Patrick R Knüsel; Edward Leen; Tim Leiner; Christian Loewe; Simon McPherson; Peter Reimer; Fritz K W Schäfer; Matthias Taupitz; Siegfried A Thurnher; Bernd Tombach; Robin Wegener; Dominik Weishaupt; James F M Meaney Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-03-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Laura J Merrill; Christina A Gurnett; Marilyn Siegel; Sushil Sonavane; Matthew B Dobbs Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2010-11-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Hakan Demirtaş; Tuna Parpar; Bumin Değirmenci; Mustafa Kara; Ahmet Orhan Çelik; Ayşe Umul; Mustafa Kayan; Ömer Yılmaz Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2016-08-29 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: R Syha; D Ketelsen; M Kaempf; S Mangold; S Sixt; T Zeller; F Springer; F Schick; C D Claussen; K Brechtel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-08-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andreas Gutzeit; Reto Sutter; Johannes M Froehlich; Justus E Roos; Thomas Sautter; Erik Schoch; Barbara Giger; Michael Wyss; Nicole Graf; Constantin von Weymarn; Regula Jenelten; Christoph A Binkert; Klaus Hergan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-05-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Iliyana P Atanasova; Ruth P Lim; Hersh Chandarana; Pippa Storey; Mary T Bruno; Daniel Kim; Vivian S Lee Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Michael Rasper; Moritz Wildgruber; Marcus Settles; Hans-Henning Eckstein; Alexander Zimmermann; Christian Reeps; Ernst J Rummeny; Armin M Huber Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 5.315