Literature DB >> 28590771

Non-contrast MR angiography using three-dimensional balanced steady-state free-precession imaging for evaluation of stenosis in the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery: a preliminary comparative study with computed tomography angiography.

Patricia P Cardia1, Thiago J Penachim2, Adilson Prando2, Ulysses S Torres3, Giuseppe D'Ippólito1,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although non-contrast MR angiography (NC-MRA) is well established for the evaluation of renal artery stenosis, its usefulness in the evaluation of other abdominal aortic branches remains to be studied. This study aimed at evaluating the image quality and diagnostic accuracy of NC-MRA using a three-dimensional balanced steady-state free-precession sequence in identifying stenosis in the celiac trunk (CTR) and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) as compared with CT angiography (CTA) as the reference standard.
METHODS: 41 patients underwent both NC-MRA and CTA of the abdominal aorta. Two radiologists analyzed the quality of the images (diagnostic vs non-diagnostic) and the performance (accuracy, sensitivity and specificity) of NC-MRA for the identification of arterial stenosis. Kappa tests were used to determine the interobserver agreement and the intermethod agreement between NC-MRA and CTA.
RESULTS: NC-MRA provided diagnostic quality images of the CTR and SMA in 87.8% and 90.2% of cases, respectively, with high interobserver agreement (kappa 0.95 and 0.80, respectively). For stenosis assessment, NC-MRA had a sensitivity of 100%, a positive-predictive value of 50% and a negative-predictive value of 100% for both segments, with accuracies of 88.8% for the CTR and 94.5% for the SMA.
CONCLUSION: NC-MRA is an accurate method for detecting stenosis in the CTR and SMA. Advances in knowledge: Data from this study suggest that MR angiography with balanced steady-state free-precession sequence is a viable non-contrast alternative for stenosis evaluation of these branches in patients for whom a contrast-enhanced examination is contraindicated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28590771      PMCID: PMC5594983          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  38 in total

1.  Consensus interpretation in imaging research: is there a better way?

Authors:  Alexander A Bankier; Deborah Levine; Elkan F Halpern; Herbert Y Kressel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Bias in research studies.

Authors:  Gregory T Sica
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Advances in vascular imaging.

Authors:  Jason T Perry; John D Statler
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.741

4.  Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of visceral arteries in patients with suspected chronic mesenteric ischemia.

Authors:  J F Meaney; M R Prince; T T Nostrant; J C Stanley
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1997 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  Non-contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the abdomen.

Authors:  Mitsue Miyazaki; Hiroyoshi Isoda
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 3.528

6.  16-MDCT angiography in living kidney donors at various tube potentials: impact on image quality and radiation dose.

Authors:  Dushyant V Sahani; Sanjeeva P Kalva; Peter F Hahn; Sanjay Saini
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 7.  Mesenteric ischemia.

Authors:  Joseph L Bobadilla
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 2.741

8.  An international multicenter comparison of time-SLIP unenhanced MR angiography and contrast-enhanced CT angiography for assessing renal artery stenosis: the renal artery contrast-free trial.

Authors:  Timothy S E Albert; Masaaki Akahane; Isabelle Parienty; Nancy Yellin; Violeta Catalá; Xavier Alomar; Antoine Prot; Nobuo Tomizawa; Huadan Xue; Venkata S Katabathina; Jorge E Lopera; Zhengyu Jin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 9.  Median arcuate ligament syndrome: evaluation with CT angiography.

Authors:  Karen M Horton; Mark A Talamini; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.333

10.  Renal artery assessment with nonenhanced steady-state free precession versus contrast-enhanced MR angiography.

Authors:  Rolf Wyttenbach; Antonio Braghetti; Michael Wyss; Mario Alerci; Lukas Briner; Paolo Santini; Luca Cozzi; Marcello Di Valentino; Marcus Katoh; Claudio Marone; Peter Vock; Augusto Gallino
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-08-23       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Noncontrast MR angiography: An update.

Authors:  Robert R Edelman; Ioannis Koktzoglou
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Unenhanced magnetic resonance angiography as an accurate alternative in the preoperative assessment of potential living kidney donors with contraindications to computed tomography angiography and to contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography.

Authors:  Fernanda Garozzo Velloni; Patrícia Prando Cardia; Ulysses Dos Santos Torres; Marco Antonio Haddad Pereira; Thiago José Penachim; Larissa Rossini Favaro; Miguel Ramalho; Giuseppe D'Ippolito
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2020 Jul-Aug

3.  Accuracy of Inflow Inversion Recovery (IFIR) for Upper Abdominal Arteries Evaluation: Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced MR and CTA.

Authors:  Roberto Simonini; Pietro Andrea Bonaffini; Marco Porta; Cesare Maino; Francesco Saverio Carbone; Ludovico Dulcetta; Paolo Brambilla; Paolo Marra; Sandro Sironi
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-28
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.