Literature DB >> 31797079

Renal artery assessment with non-enhanced MR angiography versus digital subtraction angiography: comparison between 1.5 and 3.0 T.

Xiaoxia Guo1, Ying Gong2, Zhiyuan Wu1, Fuhua Yan3, Xiaoyi Ding4, Xueqin Xu5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare non-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (NE-MRA) between 1.5 and 3.0-T using a balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) sequence in the assessment of renal artery stenosis (RAS) with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as a reference standard.
METHODS: From March 2016 to May 2018, 81 patients suspected to have significant RAS were scheduled for DSA. All patients underwent NE-MRA at either 1.5 T or 3.0 T randomly before DSA. In total, 49 patients underwent 1.5-T NE-MRA, and 32 patients underwent 3.0-T NE-MRA. Image quality was assessed. Degree of stenosis evaluated with NE-MRA was compared with that with DSA.
RESULTS: NE-MRA provided excellent image qualities for segment 1 and segment 2 at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. Image qualities for segment 3 and segment 4 and the degree of renal artery branches were significantly higher at 3.0 T than at 1.5 T (p < 0.01). Stenoses evaluated with NE-MRA at 1.5 T (r = 0.853, p < 0.01) and 3.0 T (r = 0.811, p < 0.01) were highly correlated with those of DSA. The Bland-Altman plots showed overestimated degrees of stenosis at 1.5 T (mean bias, 3.5% ± 20.4) and 3.0 T (mean bias, 8.4% ± 21.7). The sensitivity and specificity for significant stenosis were 97.4% and 89.8% for 1.5 T and 95.7% and 91.1% for 3.0 T.
CONCLUSIONS: Both 1.5-T and 3.0-T bSSFP NE-MRA can reliably assess RAS, with high image quality and good diagnostic accuracy. Performing NE-MRA at 3.0 T significantly improved visualization of renal artery branches but showed greater tendency to overestimate stenosis compared with that at 1.5 T. KEY POINTS: • Both 1.5-T and 3.0-T NE-MRA provide excellent image quality and good diagnostic accuracy for RAS. • NE-MRA at 3.0 T improved visualization of renal artery branches compared with that at 1.5 T.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Angiography, digital subtraction; Magnetic resonance angiography; Renal artery obstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31797079     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06440-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  29 in total

Review 1.  Renovascular hypertension and ischemic nephropathy.

Authors:  Vesna D Garovic; Stephen C Textor
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Renal artery stenosis: detection and quantification with spiral CT angiography versus optimized digital subtraction angiography.

Authors:  R Kaatee; F J Beek; E E de Lange; M S van Leeuwen; H F Smits; P J van der Ven; J J Beutler; W P Mali
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Nonenhanced MR angiography.

Authors:  Mitsue Miyazaki; Vivian S Lee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Non-contrast-enhanced MRA of renal artery stenosis: validation against DSA in a porcine model.

Authors:  T A Bley; C J François; M L Schiebler; O Wieben; N Takei; J H Brittain; A Munoz Del Rio; T M Grist; S B Reeder
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Renal artery stenosis: optimizing diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  William R Colyer; Ehab Eltahawy; Christopher J Cooper
Journal:  Prog Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.194

6.  Renal artery stenosis evaluation in chronic kidney disease patients: nonenhanced time-spatial labeling inversion-pulse three-dimensional MR angiography with regulated breathing versus DSA.

Authors:  Isabelle Parienty; Guy Rostoker; Francis Jouniaux; Michel Piotin; Faiza Admiraal-Behloul; Mitsue Miyazaki
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Clinical benefit of renal artery angioplasty with stenting for the control of recurrent and refractory congestive heart failure.

Authors:  Bruce H Gray; Jeffrey W Olin; Mary Beth Childs; Timothy M Sullivan; J Michael Bacharach
Journal:  Vasc Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.239

8.  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

9.  3D FIESTA pulse sequence for assessing renal artery stenosis: is it a reliable application in unenhanced magnetic resonance angiography?

Authors:  Caterina Gaudiano; Fiorenza Busato; Emiliana Ferramosca; Carlo Cecchelli; Beniamino Corcioni; Lucia Barbara De Sanctis; Antonio Santoro; Rita Golfieri
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Management of renal artery stenosis: the case for intervention, defending current guidelines, and screening (drive-by) renal angiography at the time of catheterization.

Authors:  Christopher J White
Journal:  Prog Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 8.194

View more
  3 in total

1.  One-stop preoperative assessment of renal vessels for living donors with 3.0 T non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: compared with computerized tomography angiography and surgical results.

Authors:  Xiaotian Li; Fangjie Xia; Lihua Chen; Xiaodong Zhang; Chunbai Mo; Wen Shen
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  IVIM-DKI for differentiation between prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia: comparison of 1.5 T vs. 3 T MRI.

Authors:  Archana Vadiraj Malagi; Arjunlokesh Netaji; Virendra Kumar; Esha Baidya Kayal; Kedar Khare; Chandan Jyoti Das; Fernando Calamante; Amit Mehndiratta
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 2.533

Review 3.  Musculoskeletal MRI at 7 T: do we need more or is it more than enough?

Authors:  Giacomo Aringhieri; Virna Zampa; Michela Tosetti
Journal:  Eur Radiol Exp       Date:  2020-08-06
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.