Y J Heo1, H W Jeong2, J W Baek1, S T Kim3, Y G Jeong3, J Y Lee4, S-C Jin5. 1. From the Departments of Radiology (Y.J.H., H.W.J., J.W.B.). 2. From the Departments of Radiology (Y.J.H., H.W.J., J.W.B.) hwjeong2000@hanmail.net. 3. Neurosurgery (S.T.K., Y.G.J.). 4. Internal Medicine (J.Y.L.), Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea. 5. Department of Neurosurgery (S.-C.J.), Inje University Haeundae Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Time-of-flight MR angiography, though widely used after coil embolization, is associated with limitations owing to magnetic susceptibility and radiofrequency shielding following stent-assisted coil embolization. We evaluated the pointwise encoding time reduction with radial acquisition (PETRA) sequence in subtraction-based MRA (qMRA) using an ultrashort TE relative to TOF-MRA during the follow-up of stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients (3 men and 22 women; mean age, 59.1 ± 14.0 years) underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms and were retrospectively evaluated using TOF-MRA and PETRA qMRA data from the same follow-up session. Two neuroradiologists independently reviewed both MRA findings and subjectively graded flow within the stents (relative to the latest DSA findings) and occlusion status (complete occlusion or neck/aneurysm remnant). Interobserver and intermodality agreement for TOF-MRA and PETRA qMRA were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean score for flow visualization within the stents was significantly higher in PETRA qMRA than in TOF-MRA (P < .001 for both observers), and good interobserver agreement was reported (κ = 0.63). The aneurysm occlusion status of PETRA qMRA (observer 1, 92.0%; observer 2, 88.0%) was more consistent with DSA than with TOF-MRA (observer 1, 76.0%; observer 2, 80.0%), and there was a better intermodality agreement between DSA and PETRA qMRA than between DSA and TOF-MRA. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that PETRA qMRA is a useful follow-up technique for patients who have undergone stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Time-of-flight MR angiography, though widely used after coil embolization, is associated with limitations owing to magnetic susceptibility and radiofrequency shielding following stent-assisted coil embolization. We evaluated the pointwise encoding time reduction with radial acquisition (PETRA) sequence in subtraction-based MRA (qMRA) using an ultrashort TE relative to TOF-MRA during the follow-up of stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients (3 men and 22 women; mean age, 59.1 ± 14.0 years) underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms and were retrospectively evaluated using TOF-MRA and PETRA qMRA data from the same follow-up session. Two neuroradiologists independently reviewed both MRA findings and subjectively graded flow within the stents (relative to the latest DSA findings) and occlusion status (complete occlusion or neck/aneurysm remnant). Interobserver and intermodality agreement for TOF-MRA and PETRA qMRA were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean score for flow visualization within the stents was significantly higher in PETRA qMRA than in TOF-MRA (P < .001 for both observers), and good interobserver agreement was reported (κ = 0.63). The aneurysm occlusion status of PETRA qMRA (observer 1, 92.0%; observer 2, 88.0%) was more consistent with DSA than with TOF-MRA (observer 1, 76.0%; observer 2, 80.0%), and there was a better intermodality agreement between DSA and PETRA qMRA than between DSA and TOF-MRA. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that PETRA qMRA is a useful follow-up technique for patients who have undergone stent-assisted coil embolization for anterior circulation aneurysms.
Authors: J M Meyer; A Buecker; E Spuentrup; K Schuermann; M Huetten; R D Hilgers; J J van Vaals; R W Guenther Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Samantha J Holdsworth; Sarah J Macpherson; Kristen W Yeom; Max Wintermark; Greg Zaharchuk Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: R Irie; M Suzuki; M Yamamoto; N Takano; Y Suga; M Hori; K Kamagata; M Takayama; M Yoshida; S Sato; N Hamasaki; H Oishi; S Aoki Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Alejandro Santillan; Edward Greenberg; Athos Patsalides; Kimberly Salvaggio; Howard A Riina; Y Pierre Gobin Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Jean Raymond; François Guilbert; Alain Weill; Stavros A Georganos; Louis Juravsky; Anick Lambert; Julie Lamoureux; Miguel Chagnon; Daniel Roy Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-05-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Robert A Willinsky; Steve M Taylor; Karel TerBrugge; Richard I Farb; George Tomlinson; Walter Montanera Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-03-13 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P Shahrouki; R Gupta; P Belani; A Chien; A H Doshi; R De Leacy; J T Fifi; J Mocco; K Nael Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: You Na Kim; Jin Wook Choi; Yong Cheol Lim; Jihye Song; Ji Hyun Park; Woo Sang Jung Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 3.500