Matthew D Alexander1,2, Adam de Havenon3, Seong-Eun Kim4, Dennis L Parker4, Joseph S McNally4. 1. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Matthew.Alexander@hsc.utah.edu. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, Room 1A071, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. Matthew.Alexander@hsc.utah.edu. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 4. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Quantitative measures of vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging (vwMRI) for the evaluation of intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) offers standardization not available with previously used qualitative approaches that may be difficult to replicate. METHODS: vwMRI studies performed to evaluate ICAD that had caused a stroke were analyzed. Two blinded reviewers qualitatively rated culprit lesions for the presence of enhancement on T1 delay alternating with nutation for tailored excitation (DANTE) SPACE images. At least 3 months later, quantitative analysis was performed of the same images, comparing lesion enhancement to reference structures. Cohen's kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to assess agreement. Ratios of enhancement of lesions to references were compared to qualitative ratings. RESULTS: Studies from 54 patients met inclusion criteria. A mean of 49 (90.7%) lesions were qualitatively rated as enhancing, with good inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.783). Among reference structure candidates, low infundibulum demonstrated the highest inter-rater agreement on pre- and post-contrast imaging. The ratio of percentage increase in plaque signal following contrast to the same measure in low infundibulum demonstrated the highest agreement with qualitative assessment, with highest agreement seen with a ratio of 0.8 set as a threshold (κ = 0.675). CONCLUSION: Quantitative metrics can yield objective data to better standardize techniques and acceptance of vwMRI evaluation of ICAD. The low infundibulum had the highest inter-rater agreement on both pre- and post-contrast images and is best suited as a normally enhancing reference structure. Such quantitative techniques should be implemented in future research of vwMRI for the evaluation of ICAD.
PURPOSE: Quantitative measures of vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging (vwMRI) for the evaluation of intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) offers standardization not available with previously used qualitative approaches that may be difficult to replicate. METHODS: vwMRI studies performed to evaluate ICAD that had caused a stroke were analyzed. Two blinded reviewers qualitatively rated culprit lesions for the presence of enhancement on T1 delay alternating with nutation for tailored excitation (DANTE) SPACE images. At least 3 months later, quantitative analysis was performed of the same images, comparing lesion enhancement to reference structures. Cohen's kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to assess agreement. Ratios of enhancement of lesions to references were compared to qualitative ratings. RESULTS: Studies from 54 patients met inclusion criteria. A mean of 49 (90.7%) lesions were qualitatively rated as enhancing, with good inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.783). Among reference structure candidates, low infundibulum demonstrated the highest inter-rater agreement on pre- and post-contrast imaging. The ratio of percentage increase in plaque signal following contrast to the same measure in low infundibulum demonstrated the highest agreement with qualitative assessment, with highest agreement seen with a ratio of 0.8 set as a threshold (κ = 0.675). CONCLUSION: Quantitative metrics can yield objective data to better standardize techniques and acceptance of vwMRI evaluation of ICAD. The low infundibulum had the highest inter-rater agreement on both pre- and post-contrast images and is best suited as a normally enhancing reference structure. Such quantitative techniques should be implemented in future research of vwMRI for the evaluation of ICAD.
Authors: James G Smirniotopoulos; Frances M Murphy; Elizabeth J Rushing; John H Rees; Jason W Schroeder Journal: Radiographics Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Chun Yuan; William S Kerwin; Marina S Ferguson; Nayak Polissar; Shaoxiong Zhang; Jianming Cai; Thomas S Hatsukami Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Bruce A Wasserman; William I Smith; Hugh H Trout; Richard O Cannon; Robert S Balaban; Andrew E Arai Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: N Yamada; M Higashi; R Otsubo; T Sakuma; N Oyama; R Tanaka; K Iihara; H Naritomi; K Minematsu; H Naito Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: R H Swartz; S S Bhuta; R I Farb; R Agid; R A Willinsky; K G Terbrugge; J Butany; B A Wasserman; D M Johnstone; F L Silver; D J Mikulis Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jae W Song; Athanasios Pavlou; Morgan P Burke; Haochang Shou; Kofi-Buaku Atsina; Jiayu Xiao; Laurie A Loevner; David Mankoff; Zhaoyang Fan; Scott E Kasner Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 2.995
Authors: J Scott McNally; Adam de Havenon; Seong-Eun Kim; Chuanzhuo Wang; Shuping Wang; Matthew S Zabriskie; Dennis L Parker; Hediyeh Baradaran; Matthew D Alexander Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2020-12-16