A Korn1, B Bender, H Brodoefel, T-K Hauser, S Danz, U Ernemann, C Thomas. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany, andreas.korn@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigated the agreement of dual-energy computed tomography angiography (DE-CTA) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA)in the quantitative measurement of stenoses of the internal carotid artery in comparison with digital subtraction angiography (DSA). METHODS: A total of 21 patients with stenoses of the external carotid artery were investigated with a DE-CTA and CE-MRA before undergoing carotid angioplasty. The grade of the stenoses was assessed in axial multiplanar reformations (MPR) before and multi-intensity projections (MIP) after plaque subtraction (PS) and compared with results from CE-MRA and DSA according to the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. RESULTS: Average grades of stenoses were 80.7 ± 16.1 % (DSA), 81.4 ± 15.3 % (MRA), 80.0 ± 16.7 % (DE-CTA-MPR), and 85.2 ± 14.7 % (DE-CTA-PS-MIP). Of 21 stenoses, 6 were filiform (stenosis grade, 99 %) in the DSA examination. Five of these cases were identified as pseudo-occlusions in MRA, while four were considered as occlusions in DE-CTA-PS-MIP. Another four cases were identified as pseudo-occlusion in DE-CTA-PS-MIP, which were identified as 90 % stenosis in the DSA examination. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with the gold standard DSA, DE-CTA-MPR had a slightly better agreement in measuring the degree of stenosis of the internal carotid arteries than CE-MRA. In DE-CTA-PS-MIP images, a systematic overestimation has to be taken into account due to partial extinction of the lumen by the PS algorithm. Nevertheless, DE-CTA should be preferred in imaging patients with carotid artery stenosis in the presence of extensive calcifications.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We investigated the agreement of dual-energy computed tomography angiography (DE-CTA) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA)in the quantitative measurement of stenoses of the internal carotid artery in comparison with digital subtraction angiography (DSA). METHODS: A total of 21 patients with stenoses of the external carotid artery were investigated with a DE-CTA and CE-MRA before undergoing carotid angioplasty. The grade of the stenoses was assessed in axial multiplanar reformations (MPR) before and multi-intensity projections (MIP) after plaque subtraction (PS) and compared with results from CE-MRA and DSA according to the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. RESULTS: Average grades of stenoses were 80.7 ± 16.1 % (DSA), 81.4 ± 15.3 % (MRA), 80.0 ± 16.7 % (DE-CTA-MPR), and 85.2 ± 14.7 % (DE-CTA-PS-MIP). Of 21 stenoses, 6 were filiform (stenosis grade, 99 %) in the DSA examination. Five of these cases were identified as pseudo-occlusions in MRA, while four were considered as occlusions in DE-CTA-PS-MIP. Another four cases were identified as pseudo-occlusion in DE-CTA-PS-MIP, which were identified as 90 % stenosis in the DSA examination. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with the gold standard DSA, DE-CTA-MPR had a slightly better agreement in measuring the degree of stenosis of the internal carotid arteries than CE-MRA. In DE-CTA-PS-MIP images, a systematic overestimation has to be taken into account due to partial extinction of the lumen by the PS algorithm. Nevertheless, DE-CTA should be preferred in imaging patients with carotid artery stenosis in the presence of extensive calcifications.
Authors: Andreas Koops; Harald Ittrich; Susan Petri; Andrew Priest; Alexander Stork; Ute Lockemann; Gerhard Adam; Christoph Weber Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2006-04-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Kiran R Nandalur; Erol Baskurt; Klaus D Hagspiel; C Douglas Phillips; Christopher M Kramer Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: H J M Barnett; D W Taylor; R B Haynes; D L Sackett; S J Peerless; G G Ferguson; A J Fox; R N Rankin; V C Hachinski; D O Wiebers; M Eliasziw Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Martin Petersilka; Herbert Bruder; Bernhard Krauss; Karl Stierstorfer; Thomas G Flohr Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2008-10-07 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: M Kappelhof; H A Marquering; O A Berkhemer; J Borst; A van der Lugt; W H van Zwam; J A Vos; G Lycklama À Nijeholt; C B L M Majoie; B J Emmer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Lorenzo Mannelli; Lawrence MacDonald; Marcello Mancini; Marina Ferguson; William P Shuman; Monica Ragucci; Serena Monti; Dongxiang Xu; Chun Yuan; Lee M Mitsumori Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-12-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Lukas Andereggen; Sepideh Amin-Hanjani; Jürgen Beck; Markus M Luedi; Jan Gralla; Gerrit A Schubert; Angelo Tortora; Robert H Andres; Marcel Arnold; Andreas Raabe; Michael Reinert Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.086