Lilian Pasin1, Matheus Zanon2,3,4, Jose Moreira1, Ana Luiza Moreira1, Guilherme Watte5, Edson Marchiori6, Bruno Hochhegger1,7. 1. Department of Radiology, Pavilhão Pereira Filho Hospital, Irmandade Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Av. Independência, 75, Porto Alegre, 90020-160, Brazil. 2. Department of Radiology, Pavilhão Pereira Filho Hospital, Irmandade Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Av. Independência, 75, Porto Alegre, 90020-160, Brazil. mhgzanon@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Clinical Medicine, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, R. Sarmento Leite, 245, Porto Alegre, 90050-170, Brazil. mhgzanon@hotmail.com. 4. , R. Luiz Afonso, 307, 407 - Cidade Baixa, Porto Alegre, RS, 90050-310, Brazil. mhgzanon@hotmail.com. 5. Post-Graduation Program in Chest Medicine Sciences, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, R. Ramiro Barcelos, 2400, Porto Alegre, 90035-003, Brazil. 6. Department of Radiology, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373, Rio de Janeiro, 21941-902, Brazil. 7. Department of Clinical Medicine, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, R. Sarmento Leite, 245, Porto Alegre, 90050-170, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the diagnostic value for pulmonary embolism (PE) of the True fast imaging with steady-state precession (TrueFISP) MRI, a method that allows the visualization of pulmonary vasculature without breath holding or intravenous contrast. METHODS: This is a prospective investigation including 93 patients with suspected PE. All patients underwent TrueFISP MRI after undergoing CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Two independent readers evaluated each MR study, and consensus was obtained. CTPA results were analysed by a third independent reviewer and these results served as the reference standard. A fourth radiologist was responsible for evaluating if lesions found on MRI for both analysis were the same and if these were the correspondent lesions on the CTPA. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy were calculated. Evidence for death from PE within the 1-year follow-up was also assessed. RESULTS: Two patients could not undergo the real-time MRI and were excluded from the study. PE prevalence was 22%. During the 1-year follow-up period, eight patients died, whereas PE was responsible for 12.5% of cases. Between patients who developed PE, only 5% died due to this condition. There were no differences between MR and CT embolism detection in these subjects. MR sequences had a sensitivity of 85%, specificity was 98.6% and accuracy was 95.6%. Agreement between readers was high (κ= 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with contrast-enhanced CT, unenhanced MR sequences demonstrate good accuracy and no differences in the mortality rates in 1 year were detected.
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the diagnostic value for pulmonary embolism (PE) of the True fast imaging with steady-state precession (TrueFISP) MRI, a method that allows the visualization of pulmonary vasculature without breath holding or intravenous contrast. METHODS: This is a prospective investigation including 93 patients with suspected PE. All patients underwent TrueFISP MRI after undergoing CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Two independent readers evaluated each MR study, and consensus was obtained. CTPA results were analysed by a third independent reviewer and these results served as the reference standard. A fourth radiologist was responsible for evaluating if lesions found on MRI for both analysis were the same and if these were the correspondent lesions on the CTPA. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy were calculated. Evidence for death from PE within the 1-year follow-up was also assessed. RESULTS: Two patients could not undergo the real-time MRI and were excluded from the study. PE prevalence was 22%. During the 1-year follow-up period, eight patients died, whereas PE was responsible for 12.5% of cases. Between patients who developed PE, only 5% died due to this condition. There were no differences between MR and CT embolism detection in these subjects. MR sequences had a sensitivity of 85%, specificity was 98.6% and accuracy was 95.6%. Agreement between readers was high (κ= 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with contrast-enhanced CT, unenhanced MR sequences demonstrate good accuracy and no differences in the mortality rates in 1 year were detected.
Authors: Bobby Kalb; Puneet Sharma; Stefan Tigges; Gaye L Ray; Hiroumi D Kitajima; James R Costello; Zhengjia Chen; Diego R Martin Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Karin Janata; Michael Holzer; Hans Domanovits; Marcus Müllner; Alexander Bankier; Amir Kurtaran; Hans C Bankl; Anton N Laggner Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2002-09-30 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Long Jiang Zhang; Song Luo; Benjamin M Yeh; Chang Sheng Zhou; Chun Xiang Tang; Yan'e Zhao; Lin Li; Ling Zheng; Wei Huang; Guang Ming Lu Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: David Levin; Joon Beom Seo; David G Kiely; Hiroto Hatabu; Warren Gefter; Edwin J R van Beek; Mark L Schiebler Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Pierre-Marie Roy; Guy Meyer; Bruno Vielle; Catherine Le Gall; Franck Verschuren; Françoise Carpentier; Philippe Leveau; Alain Furber Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-02-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Mona Salehi Ravesh; Karolin Tesch; Annett Lebenatus; Ioannis Koktzoglou; Robert R Edelman; Matthias Eden; Patrick Langguth; Joachim Graessner; Olav Jansen; Marcus Both Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2020-06-14 Impact factor: 4.813