OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (PCASL) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) with 3-dimensional (3D) radial acquisition for the detection of intracranial arteriovenous (AV) shunts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 patients who underwent PCASL-MRA, clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/MRA exam, and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were included in this retrospective analysis. Twelve patients presented with AV shunts. Among these were 8 patients with AV malformations (AVM) and 4 patients with AV fistulas (AVF). The clinical MRI/MRA included 3D time-of-flight MRA in all cases and time-resolved, contrast-enhanced MRA in 9 cases (6 cases with AV shunting). Research MRI and clinical MRI were independently evaluated by 2 neuroradiologists blinded to patient history. A third radiologist evaluated DSA imaging. A diagnostic confidence score was used for the presence of abnormalities associated with AV shunting (1-5). The AVMs were characterized using the Spetzler-Martin scale, whereas AVFs were characterized using the Borden classification. κ Statistics were applied to assess intermodality agreement. RESULTS: Compared with clinical MRA, noncontrast PCASL-MRA with 3D radial acquisition yielded excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of intracranial AV shunts (reader 1: 100%/100%, clinical MRA: 91.7%, 94.4%; reader 2: 91.7%/100%, clinical MRA: 91.7%/100%). Diagnostic confidence was 4.8/4.66 with PCASL-MRA and 4.25/4.66 with clinical MRA. For AVM characterization with PCASL-MRA, intermodality agreement with DSA showed κ values of 0.43 and 0.6 for readers 1 and 2, respectively. For AVF characterization, intermodality agreement showed κ values of 0.56 for both readers. CONCLUSION: Noncontrast PCASL-MRA with 3D radial acquisition is a potential tool for the detection and characterization of intracranial AV shunts with a sensitivity and specificity equivalent or higher than routine clinical MRA.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (PCASL) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) with 3-dimensional (3D) radial acquisition for the detection of intracranial arteriovenous (AV) shunts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 patients who underwent PCASL-MRA, clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/MRA exam, and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were included in this retrospective analysis. Twelve patients presented with AV shunts. Among these were 8 patients with AV malformations (AVM) and 4 patients with AV fistulas (AVF). The clinical MRI/MRA included 3D time-of-flight MRA in all cases and time-resolved, contrast-enhanced MRA in 9 cases (6 cases with AV shunting). Research MRI and clinical MRI were independently evaluated by 2 neuroradiologists blinded to patient history. A third radiologist evaluated DSA imaging. A diagnostic confidence score was used for the presence of abnormalities associated with AV shunting (1-5). The AVMs were characterized using the Spetzler-Martin scale, whereas AVFs were characterized using the Borden classification. κ Statistics were applied to assess intermodality agreement. RESULTS: Compared with clinical MRA, noncontrast PCASL-MRA with 3D radial acquisition yielded excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of intracranial AV shunts (reader 1: 100%/100%, clinical MRA: 91.7%, 94.4%; reader 2: 91.7%/100%, clinical MRA: 91.7%/100%). Diagnostic confidence was 4.8/4.66 with PCASL-MRA and 4.25/4.66 with clinical MRA. For AVM characterization with PCASL-MRA, intermodality agreement with DSA showed κ values of 0.43 and 0.6 for readers 1 and 2, respectively. For AVF characterization, intermodality agreement showed κ values of 0.56 for both readers. CONCLUSION: Noncontrast PCASL-MRA with 3D radial acquisition is a potential tool for the detection and characterization of intracranial AV shunts with a sensitivity and specificity equivalent or higher than routine clinical MRA.
Authors: Charles A McKenzie; Ernest N Yeh; Michael A Ohliger; Mark D Price; Daniel K Sodickson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Marc-André Weber; Matthias Günther; Matthias P Lichy; Stefan Delorme; André Bongers; Christoph Thilmann; Marco Essig; Ivan Zuna; Lothar R Schad; Jürgen Debus; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Huimin Wu; Walter F Block; Patrick A Turski; Charles A Mistretta; David J Rusinak; Yijing Wu; Kevin M Johnson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: J F Hak; G Boulouis; B Kerleroux; S Benichi; S Stricker; F Gariel; L Garzelli; P Meyer; M Kossorotoff; N Boddaert; N Girard; V Vidal; V Dangouloff Ros; T Blauwblomme; O Naggara Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: Aishwarya Raman; Manish Uprety; Maria Jose Calero; Maria Resah B Villanueva; Narges Joshaghani; Nicole Villa; Omar Badla; Raman Goit; Samia E Saddik; Sarah N Dawood; Ahmad M Rabih; Ahmad Mohammed; Tharun Yadhav Selvamani; Jihan Mostafa Journal: Cureus Date: 2022-06-09