PURPOSE: To assess the image quality and diagnostic performance achieved by using supra-aortic 3D-TR-CE-k-t BLAST MRA and a nondedicated body coil as compared with conventional CE-MRA in patients with acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 36 consecutive patients with a suspected acute ischemic stroke underwent both k-t BLAST MRA and conventional CE-MRA. Image quality was assessed using visual and quantitative criteria and the techniques were compared. Both techniques were compared for degree of visual and quantitative measurement of carotid stenosis. RESULTS: Delineation of vessel lumen and overall diagnostic confidence were significantly better with CE-MRA, respectively 3.4 ± 0.5 and 3.3 ± 0.6 (mean score ± SD), than with k-t BLAST MRA, respectively 2.8 ± 0.4 and 2.9 ± 0.5 (P < 0.02). SNR and CNR were significantly higher for k-t BLAST MRA, respectively 33.5 ± 19.3 and 27.9 ± 19.3, than for CE-MRA, respectively 25.7 ± 10 and 20.4 ± 8.4 (P < 0.03). Intertechnique agreement was good for carotid stenosis characterization (κ = .763). For the 14 relevant stenosis, stenosis measurements were highly correlated between techniques (0.96; P < 0.0001). The Bland-Altman plot showed a low bias in assessment of the degree of stenosis (mean bias 2.1% ± 7.7). CONCLUSION: k-t BLAST MRA using a nondedicated coil offering and dynamic information was a effective diagnostic tool for detection and characterization of carotid stenosis.
PURPOSE: To assess the image quality and diagnostic performance achieved by using supra-aortic 3D-TR-CE-k-t BLAST MRA and a nondedicated body coil as compared with conventional CE-MRA in patients with acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 36 consecutive patients with a suspected acute ischemic stroke underwent both k-t BLAST MRA and conventional CE-MRA. Image quality was assessed using visual and quantitative criteria and the techniques were compared. Both techniques were compared for degree of visual and quantitative measurement of carotid stenosis. RESULTS: Delineation of vessel lumen and overall diagnostic confidence were significantly better with CE-MRA, respectively 3.4 ± 0.5 and 3.3 ± 0.6 (mean score ± SD), than with k-t BLAST MRA, respectively 2.8 ± 0.4 and 2.9 ± 0.5 (P < 0.02). SNR and CNR were significantly higher for k-t BLAST MRA, respectively 33.5 ± 19.3 and 27.9 ± 19.3, than for CE-MRA, respectively 25.7 ± 10 and 20.4 ± 8.4 (P < 0.03). Intertechnique agreement was good for carotid stenosis characterization (κ = .763). For the 14 relevant stenosis, stenosis measurements were highly correlated between techniques (0.96; P < 0.0001). The Bland-Altman plot showed a low bias in assessment of the degree of stenosis (mean bias 2.1% ± 7.7). CONCLUSION: k-t BLAST MRA using a nondedicated coil offering and dynamic information was a effective diagnostic tool for detection and characterization of carotid stenosis.
Authors: Zachary Clark; Kevin M Johnson; Yijing Wu; Myriam Edjlali; Charles Mistretta; Oliver Wieben; Patrick Turski Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Tilman Schubert; Yijing Wu; Kevin M Johnson; Oliver Wieben; Jane Maksimovic; Charles Mistretta; Patrick Turski Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 6.016