PURPOSE: To evaluate diagnostic performance of three nonenhanced methods: variable-refocusing-flip angle (FA) fast spin-echo (SE)-based magnetic resonance (MR) angiography (variable FA MR) and constant-refocusing-FA fast SE-based MR angiography (constant-FA MR) and flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD)-prepared steady-state free precession MR angiography (FSD MR) for calf arteries, with dual-injection three-station contrast material-enhanced MR angiography (gadolinium-enhanced MR) as reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant, with informed consent. Twenty-one patients (13 men, eight women; mean age, 62.6 years) underwent calf-station variable-FA MR, constant-FA MR, and FSD MR at 1.5 T, with gadolinium-enhanced MR as reference. Image quality and stenosis severity were assessed in 13 segments per leg by two radiologists blinded to clinical data. Combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR reading was also performed. Methods were compared (logistic regression for correlated data) for diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Of 546 arterial segments, 148 (27.1%) had a hemodynamically significant (≥ 50%) stenosis. Image quality was satisfactory for all nonenhanced MR sequences. FSD MR was significantly superior to both other sequences (P < .0001), with 5-cm smaller field of view; 9.6% variable-FA MR, 9.6% constant-FA MR, and 0% FSD MR segmental evaluations had nondiagnostic image quality scores, mainly from high diastolic flow (variable-FA MR) and motion artifact (constant-FA MR). Stenosis sensitivity and specificity were highest for FSD MR (80.3% and 81.7%, respectively), compared with those for constant-FA MR (72.3%, P = .086; and 81.8%, P = .96) and variable-FA MR (75.9%, P = .54; and 75.6%, P = .22). Combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR had superior sensitivity (81.8%) and specificity (88.3%) compared with constant-FA MR (P = .0076), variable-FA MR (P = .0044), and FSD MR (P = .0013). All sequences had an excellent negative predictive value (NPV): 93.2%, constant-FA MR; 94.7%, variable-FA MR; 91.7%, FSD MR; and 92.9%, combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR. CONCLUSION: At 1.5 T, all evaluated nonenhanced MR angiographic methods demonstrated satisfactory image quality and excellent NPV for hemodynamically significant stenosis. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12120859/-/DC1. RSNA, 2013
PURPOSE: To evaluate diagnostic performance of three nonenhanced methods: variable-refocusing-flip angle (FA) fast spin-echo (SE)-based magnetic resonance (MR) angiography (variable FA MR) and constant-refocusing-FA fast SE-based MR angiography (constant-FA MR) and flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD)-prepared steady-state free precession MR angiography (FSD MR) for calf arteries, with dual-injection three-station contrast material-enhanced MR angiography (gadolinium-enhanced MR) as reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant, with informed consent. Twenty-one patients (13 men, eight women; mean age, 62.6 years) underwent calf-station variable-FA MR, constant-FA MR, and FSD MR at 1.5 T, with gadolinium-enhanced MR as reference. Image quality and stenosis severity were assessed in 13 segments per leg by two radiologists blinded to clinical data. Combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR reading was also performed. Methods were compared (logistic regression for correlated data) for diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Of 546 arterial segments, 148 (27.1%) had a hemodynamically significant (≥ 50%) stenosis. Image quality was satisfactory for all nonenhanced MR sequences. FSD MR was significantly superior to both other sequences (P < .0001), with 5-cm smaller field of view; 9.6% variable-FA MR, 9.6% constant-FA MR, and 0% FSD MR segmental evaluations had nondiagnostic image quality scores, mainly from high diastolic flow (variable-FA MR) and motion artifact (constant-FA MR). Stenosis sensitivity and specificity were highest for FSD MR (80.3% and 81.7%, respectively), compared with those for constant-FA MR (72.3%, P = .086; and 81.8%, P = .96) and variable-FA MR (75.9%, P = .54; and 75.6%, P = .22). Combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR had superior sensitivity (81.8%) and specificity (88.3%) compared with constant-FA MR (P = .0076), variable-FA MR (P = .0044), and FSD MR (P = .0013). All sequences had an excellent negative predictive value (NPV): 93.2%, constant-FA MR; 94.7%, variable-FA MR; 91.7%, FSD MR; and 92.9%, combined constant-FA MR and FSD MR. CONCLUSION: At 1.5 T, all evaluated nonenhanced MR angiographic methods demonstrated satisfactory image quality and excellent NPV for hemodynamically significant stenosis. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12120859/-/DC1. RSNA, 2013
Authors: Mark A Griswold; Peter M Jakob; Robin M Heidemann; Mathias Nittka; Vladimir Jellus; Jianmin Wang; Berthold Kiefer; Axel Haase Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Philip A Hodnett; Emily V Ward; Amir H Davarpanah; Timothy G Scanlon; Jeremy D Collins; Christopher B Glielmi; Xiaoming Bi; Ioannis Koktzoglou; Navyash Gupta; James C Carr; Robert R Edelman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mark D Morasch; Jeremy Collins; F Scott Pereles; James C Carr; Mark K Eskandari; William H Pearce; J Paul Finn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Frank B Pomposelli; Nikhil Kansal; Alan D Hamdan; Alana Belfield; Malachi Sheahan; David R Campbell; John J Skillman; Frank W Logerfo Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Marc D Lindley; Daniel Kim; Glen Morrell; Marta E Heilbrun; Pippa Storey; Christopher J Hanrahan; Vivian S Lee Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Jie Zheng; Mary K Hastings; David Muccigross; Zhaoyang Fan; Fabao Gao; John Curci; Charles F Hildebolt; Michael J Mueller Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jie Zheng; Mary K Hasting; Xiaodong Zhang; Andrew Coggan; Hongyu An; Darrah Snozek; John Curci; Michael J Mueller Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-09-29 Impact factor: 4.268