Literature DB >> 20980449

Renal arteries: isotropic, high-spatial-resolution, unenhanced MR angiography with three-dimensional radial phase contrast.

Christopher J François1, Darren P Lum, Kevin M Johnson, Benjamin R Landgraf, Thorsten A Bley, Scott B Reeder, Mark L Schiebler, Thomas M Grist, Oliver Wieben.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare a new three-dimensional (3D) radial phase-contrast magnetic resonance (MR) angiographic method with contrast material-enhanced MR angiography for anatomic assessment of the renal arteries.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An institutional review board approved this prospective HIPAA-compliant study. Informed consent was obtained. Twenty-seven subjects (mean age, 52.6 years ± 20.5 [standard deviation]) were imaged with respiratory-gated phase-contrast vastly undersampled isotropic projection reconstruction (VIPR) prior to contrast-enhanced MR angiographic acquisition with a 3.0-T clinical system. The imaging duration for phase-contrast VIPR was 10 minutes and provided magnitude and complex difference ("angiographic") images with 3D volumetric (320 mm) coverage and isotropic high spatial resolution (1.25 mm(3)). Quantitative analysis consisted of comparing vessel diameters between the two techniques. Qualitative assessment included evaluation of the phase-contrast VIPR and contrast-enhanced MR angiographic techniques for artifacts, noise, and image quality. Bland-Altman analysis was used for comparison of quantitative measurements, and the Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for comparison of qualitative scores.
RESULTS: Phase-contrast VIPR images were successfully acquired in all subjects. The vessel diameters measured with phase-contrast VIPR were slightly greater than those measured with contrast-enhanced MR angiography (mean bias = 0.09 mm). Differences in mean artifact, quality scores for the proximal renal arteries, and overall image quality scores between phase-contrast VIPR and contrast-enhanced MR angiographic techniques were not statistically significant (P = .31 and .29, .27 and .39, and .43 and .69 for readers 1 and 2, respectively). The quality scores for the segmental renal arteries were higher for phase-contrast VIPR than for contrast-enhanced MR angiography (P < .05). Although the noise scores were higher with phase-contrast VIPR than with contrast-enhanced MR angiography and were statistically significant (P < .05), the presence of noise did not interfere with the ability to interpret the images.
CONCLUSION: Isotropic, high-spatial-resolution, unenhanced MR angiography of the renal arteries is feasible with 3D radial undersampling. © RSNA, 2010

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20980449      PMCID: PMC3009381          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100443

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  23 in total

1.  Stenosis quantification from post-stenotic signal loss in phase-contrast MRA datasets of flow phantoms and renal arteries.

Authors:  J J Westenberg; R J van der Geest; M N Wasser; J Doornbos; P M Pattynama; A de Roos; J Vanderschoot; J H Reiber
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1999-12

2.  Non-contrast-enhanced MR angiography using 3D ECG-synchronized half-Fourier fast spin echo.

Authors:  M Miyazaki; S Sugiura; F Tateishi; H Wada; Y Kassai; H Abe
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  Transstenotic pressure gradients: measurement in swine--retrospectively ECG-gated 3D phase-contrast MR angiography versus endovascular pressure-sensing guidewires.

Authors:  Darren P Lum; Kevin M Johnson; Russell K Paul; Aquilla S Turk; Daniel W Consigny; Julie R Grinde; Charles A Mistretta; Thomas M Grist
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Intraindividual comparison of high-spatial-resolution abdominal MR angiography at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: initial experience.

Authors:  Henrik J Michaely; Harald Kramer; Olaf Dietrich; Kambiz Nael; Klaus-Peter Lodemann; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Quantitative 2D and 3D phase contrast MRI: optimized analysis of blood flow and vessel wall parameters.

Authors:  A F Stalder; M F Russe; A Frydrychowicz; J Bock; J Hennig; M Markl
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 6.  Nonenhanced MR angiography.

Authors:  Mitsue Miyazaki; Vivian S Lee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Increased volume of coverage for abdominal contrast-enhanced MR angiography with two-dimensional autocalibrating parallel imaging: initial experience at 3.0 Tesla.

Authors:  Darren P Lum; Reed F Busse; Christopher J Francois; Anja C Brau; Philip J Beatty; Joshua Huff; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Evaluation of the aortoiliac and renal arteries: comparison of breath-hold, contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional MR angiography with conventional catheter angiography.

Authors:  T F Hany; J F Debatin; D A Leung; T Pfammatter
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: risk factors and incidence estimation.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Sadowski; Lindsey K Bennett; Micah R Chan; Andrew L Wentland; Andrea L Garrett; Robert W Garrett; Arjang Djamali
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-01-31       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Improved 3D phase contrast MRI with off-resonance corrected dual echo VIPR.

Authors:  Kevin M Johnson; Darren P Lum; Patrick A Turski; Walter F Block; Charles A Mistretta; Oliver Wieben
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.668

View more
  24 in total

1.  Fast 4D flow MRI re-emerges as a potential clinical tool for neuroradiology.

Authors:  P Turski; M Edjlali; C Oppenheim
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-06-27       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 2.  Sub-Nyquist acquisition and constrained reconstruction in time resolved angiography.

Authors:  Charles A Mistretta
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Non-contrast-enhanced MRA of renal artery stenosis: validation against DSA in a porcine model.

Authors:  T A Bley; C J François; M L Schiebler; O Wieben; N Takei; J H Brittain; A Munoz Del Rio; T M Grist; S B Reeder
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Regional hypoxic cerebral vasodilation facilitated by diameter changes primarily in anterior versus posterior circulation.

Authors:  J Mikhail Kellawan; John W Harrell; Alejandro Roldan-Alzate; Oliver Wieben; William G Schrage
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2016-01-01       Impact factor: 6.200

Review 5.  4D flow imaging: current status to future clinical applications.

Authors:  Michael Markl; Susanne Schnell; Alex J Barker
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 6.  Clinical Applications of MRA 4D-Flow.

Authors:  Lilia M Sierra-Galan; Christopher J François
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-09-10

7.  Four-dimensional, flow-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging of blood flow patterns in thoracic aortic dissections.

Authors:  Christopher J François; Michael Markl; Mark L Schiebler; Eric Niespodzany; Benjamin R Landgraf; Christian Schlensak; Alex Frydrychowicz
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 5.209

8.  Quiescent-inflow single-shot magnetic resonance angiography using a highly undersampled radial k-space trajectory.

Authors:  R R Edelman; S Giri; E Dunkle; M Galizia; P Amin; I Koktzoglou
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 4.668

9.  Optimized 3D ultrashort echo time pulmonary MRI.

Authors:  Kevin M Johnson; Sean B Fain; Mark L Schiebler; Scott Nagle
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 10.  Emerging Applications of Abdominal 4D Flow MRI.

Authors:  Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Christopher J Francois; Oliver Wieben; Scott B Reeder
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.