Journal article
Carotid artery: Elliptic centric Contrast-enhanced MR angiography compared with conventional angiography
Radiology, Vol.218(1), pp.138-143
2001
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja41138
PMID: 11152792
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the accuracy of elliptic centric contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography by using conventional angiography as the reference standard. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients were examined prospectively with contrast-enhanced MR angiography and conventional angiography. The two examinations were performed within 1 week of each other. Two patients underwent conventional angiography of only one carotid artery, which yielded 98 arteries for comparison. Results: With conventional angiography as the reference standard and by using a 70% threshold for internal carotid arterial diameter stenosis, maximum intensity projection (MIP) images had a sensitivity of 93.3%, specificity of 85.1%, and accuracy of 87.6%, whereas reformatted transverse source images had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 97.0%, and accuracy of 92.8%. Interobserver variability for conventional angiograms was 0.97, for MIP images was 0.91, and for source images was 0.90. The contrast-enhanced MR angiographic technique had a sensitivity of 88.9% and specificity of 58.1% for the presence of irregularity and/or ulceration. All 50 examinations were triggered appropriately so that minimal or no venous signal intensity was depicted. Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced elliptic centric three-dimensional MR angiography offers high-spatial-resolution, venous-suppressed images of the carotid arteries that appear to be adequate to replace conventional angiography in most patients examined prior to carotid endarterectomy.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- Carotid artery: Elliptic centric Contrast-enhanced MR angiography compared with conventional angiography
- Creators
- John Huston III - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesSean B Fain - RadiologyJohn T Wald - Mayo ClinicPatrick H Luetmer - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesCharlotte H Rydberg - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesDiego J Covarrobias - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesStephen J Riederer - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesMatthew A Bernstein - Department of Diagnostic Rediology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesRobert D Brown - Department of Neurology, Maye Clinic and Foundation, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United StatesFredric B Meyer - NeurosurgeryThomas C Bower - Mayo ClinicCathy D Schleck - Mayo Clinic
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Publication Details
- Radiology, Vol.218(1), pp.138-143
- Publisher
- Radiological Society of North America
- DOI
- 10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja41138
- PMID
- 11152792
- ISSN
- 0033-8419
- eISSN
- 1527-1315
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 2001
- Academic Unit
- Roy J. Carver Department of Biomedical Engineering; Radiology; Electrical and Computer Engineering
- Record Identifier
- 9984275056802771
Metrics
9 Record Views