Stenosis detection with MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography in dysfunctional hemodialysis access fistulas and grafts

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess three-dimensional contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography for stenosis depiction in malfunctioning hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and grafts (AVGs), as compared with digital subtraction angiography (DSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ethical review board approval and written informed consent were obtained. MR angiography and DSA were performed in 51 dysfunctional hemodialysis fistulas and grafts in 48 consecutive patients. Vascular tree of accesses was divided into between three and eight segments depending on access type (AVF or AVG) and length of venous outflow. Images obtained with MR and DSA were interpreted by two MR radiologists and two interventional radiologists, respectively, who were blinded to information from each other and other studies. DSA was reference standard for stenosis detection. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of contrast-enhanced MR in detection of vascular segments containing hemodynamically significant (> or =50%) stenosis were calculated. Linear-weighted kappa statistic was calculated for contrast-enhanced MR and DSA to determine interobserver agreement regarding stenosis detection. RESULTS: A total of 282 vascular segments were evaluated. Contrast-enhanced MR depicted three false-positive stenoses and all but two of 70 significant stenoses depicted with DSA. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of MR in detection of vessel segments with significant stenoses were 97% (95% CI: 90%, 99%), 99% (95% CI: 96%, 100%), 96% (95% CI: 88%, 99%), and 99% (95% CI: 97%, 100%), respectively. MR demonstrated significant stenosis in four of five nondiagnostic DSA segments, whereas DSA showed no significant stenosis in four nondiagnostic MR segments. Linear-weighted kappa statistic for interobserver agreement regarding stenosis detection was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.95) for MR and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.97) for DSA. CONCLUSION: MR angiography depicts stenoses in dysfunctional hemodialysis accesses but has limited clinical value as result of current inability to perform MR-guided access interventions after stenosis detection. MR of dysfunctional access should be considered only if nondiagnostic vascular segment is present at DSA.     

Carotid artery stenosis: accuracy of contrast-enhanced MR angiography for diagnosis

PURPOSE: To assess accuracy of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography as compared with three-dimensional (3D) time-of-flight (TOF) MR angiography and reference digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Enhanced and 3D TOF MR angiography and DSA were performed in 51 consecutive patients suspected of having carotid artery stenosis at duplex ultrasonography. Stenoses were measured by two independent observers blinded to clinical information and other test results. Pearson correlation coefficients were used, and kappa for interobserver variabilities was estimated. Sensitivity and specificity of enhanced and 3D TOF MR angiography were calculated and compared with those of DSA. RESULTS: Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.94 (P <.01) for enhanced angiography versus DSA, 0.92 (P <.01) for 3D TOF angiography versus DSA, and 0.93 (P <.01) for enhanced versus 3D TOF angiography for observer 1 and 0.94 (P <.01), 0.95 (P <.01), and 0.94 (P <.01), respectively, for observer 2. kappa statistics were 0.81 for enhanced angiography, 0.79 for 3D TOF angiography, and 0.78 for DSA. Stenosis measurements of observer 1 at enhanced MR angiography, with inclusion of carotid arteries on the symptomatic side only, compared with those of DSA yielded a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI: 68%, 99%) and a specificity of 77% (95% CI: 55%, 92%). 3D TOF angiography yielded a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI: 67%, 97%) and a specificity of 73% (95% CI: 50%, 89%) compared with those of DSA. For observer 2, sensitivity and specificity for enhanced angiography were 91% (95% CI: 70%, 99%) and 76% (95% CI: 52%, 91%), respectively, and 90% (95% CI: 68%, 99%) and 77% (95% CI: 51%, 92%), respectively, for 3D TOF angiography. CONCLUSION: Accuracy of enhanced MR angiography in diagnosis of severe stenosis is similar to that of 3D TOF MR angiography.     

Preoperative evaluation of carotid artery stenosis: comparison of contrast-enhanced MR angiography and duplex sonography with digital subtraction angiography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Contrast-enhanced MR angiography and extracranial color-coded duplex sonography are noninvasive, preoperative imaging modalities for evaluation of carotid artery stenosis. Innovative techniques and improvements in image quality require frequent reassessment of accuracy, reliability, and diagnostic value compared with those of digital subtraction angiography (DSA). We evaluated contrast-enhanced MR angiography and duplex sonography compared with DSA for detection of high-grade carotid artery stenoses. METHODS: Four readers, blinded to clinical symptoms and the outcome of other studies, independently evaluated stenoses on contrast-enhanced MR angiograms in 71 vessels of 39 symptomatic patients. Duplex sonography was also performed in all vessels. The severity of stenosis was defined according to North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial criteria (0-29%, 30-69%, 70-99%, 100%). Results of both modalities were compared with the corresponding DSA findings. RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced MR angiography had a sensitivity and specificity of 94.9% and 79.1%, respectively, for the identification of carotid artery stenoses of 70% or greater. Sensitivity and specificity of duplex sonography were 92.9% and 81.9%, respectively. Combining data from both tests revealed a sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 81.4%, respectively, for concordant results (80% of vessels). CONCLUSION: Concordant results of contrast-enhanced MR angiography and duplex sonography increase the diagnostic sensitivity to 100%. The reliability of MR angiography is comparable to that of DSA. The combination of contrast-enhanced MR angiography and duplex sonography might be preferable over DSA for preoperative evaluation in most patients, thus reducing the risk of perioperative morbidity and improving the overall outcome.     

Routine Use of Three-Dimensional Contrast-Enhanced Moving-Table MR Angiography in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease: Comparison with Selective Digital Subtraction Angiography

Purpose To compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced (CE) three-dimensional (3D) moving-table magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with that of selective digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for routine clinical investigation in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Methods Thirty-eight patients underwent CE 3D moving-table MR angiography of the pelvic and peripheral arteries. A commercially available large-field-of-view adapter and a dedicated peripheral vascular phased-array coil were used. MR angiograms were evaluated for grade of arterial stenosis, diagnostic quality, and presence of artifacts. MR imaging results for each patient were compared with those of selective DSA. Results Two hundred and twenty-six arterial segments in 38 patients were evaluated by both selective DSA and MR angiography. No complications related to MR angiography were observed. There was agreement in stenosis classification in 204 (90.3%) segments; MR angiography overgraded 16 (7%) segments and undergraded 6 (2.7%) segments. Compared with selective DSA, MR angiography provided high sensitivity and specificity and excellent interobserver agreement for detection of severe stenosis (97% and 95%, κ = 0.9 ± 0.03) and moderate stenosis (96.5% and 94.3%, κ = 0.9 ± 0.03). Conclusion Compared with selective DSA, moving-table MR angiography proved to be an accurate, noninvasive method for evaluation of peripheral arterial occlusive disease and may thus serve as an alternative to DSA in clinical routine.     

Peripheral arterial disease: clinical and cost comparisons between duplex US and contrast-enhanced MR angiography--a multicenter randomized trial

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the clinical and economic consequences of replacing duplex ultrasonography (US) with contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography for the initial imaging work-up of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized multicenter study was approved by the institutional review board of each hospital, and all patients signed written informed consent prior to randomization. Patients with PAD who needed to undergo imaging work-up and who had an ankle-brachial pressure index (ABPI) of less than 0.90 were recruited by vascular surgeons between January 2002 and September 2003. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo contrast-enhanced MR angiography or duplex US. The primary outcome measure was cost. Secondary outcome measures included therapeutic confidence, changes in disease severity, and changes in quality of life (QOL) assessed during 6 months of follow-up. Indicators for disease severity were based on the Rutherford classification, treadmill walking distance, ABPI at rest, and ABPI after exercise. QOL was assessed with the Rating Scale, Short Form 36, EuroQol-5D, and VascuQol questionnaires. The cost of (additional) imaging procedures, therapeutic interventions, and outpatient visits were calculated from a hospital perspective (ie, all costs incurred inside the hospital were estimated, including physician costs). Data were evaluated by using the Student t test and a multivariable linear regression analysis. RESULTS: At 6 months, 352 patients (239 [68%] men, 113 [32%] women; mean age, 65 years) were analyzed. The use of contrast-enhanced MR angiography versus duplex US reduced the number of additional vascular imaging procedures by 42%; contrast-enhanced MR angiography was also associated with higher therapeutic confidence. Diagnostic costs for contrast-enhanced MR angiography were 167 euros (186 dollars) higher than those for duplex US (P < .001). No statistically significant differences were found for total cost, changes in disease severity, or changes in QOL between patients examined with duplex US and those examined with contrast-enhanced MR angiography (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Replacing duplex US with contrast-enhanced MR angiography for the initial imaging work-up of patients with PAD reduces the need for additional imaging, although diagnostic costs are higher.     

Carotid artery stenosis: intraindividual correlations of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography, contrast-enhanced MR angiography, conventional DSA, and rotational angiography for detection and grading

PURPOSE: To compare three-dimensional (3D) time-of-flight (TOF) MR angiography, contrast-enhanced MR angiography, digital subtraction angiography (DSA), and rotational angiography for depiction of stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study had Ethics Committee approval, and each patient gave written informed consent. Forty-nine patients (18 women, mean age, 67.2 years +/- 9.1 [+/- standard deviation], and 31 men, mean age, 63.1 years +/- 8.0) with symptomatic stenosis of internal carotid artery (ICA) diagnosed at duplex ultrasonography underwent transverse 3D TOF MR angiography with sliding interleaved kY acquisition and coronal contrast-enhanced MR angiography, followed by DSA and rotational angiography within 48 hours. MR angiography was performed at 1.5-T with a cervical coil. Contrast-enhanced MR angiograms were obtained after a bolus injection of 20 mL of gadobenate dimeglumine. Maximum ICA stenosis on maximum intensity projection and source images was quantified according to NASCET criteria. Correlations for 3D TOF MR angiography, contrast-enhanced MR angiography, DSA, and rotational angiography were determined by means of cross tabulation, and accuracy for detection and grading of stenoses were calculated. Data were evaluated with analysis of variance, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and McNemar test, all at significance of P < .05. RESULTS: Ninety-eight ICAs were evaluated at contrast-enhanced MR angiography, DSA, and rotational angiography, and 97 were evaluated at 3D TOF MR angiography. Correlations for contrast-enhanced MR angiography, 3D TOF MR angiography, and DSA relative to rotational angiography were r2 = 0.9332, r2 = 0.9048, and r2 = 0.9255, respectively. Lower correlation (r2 = 0.8593) was noted for contrast-enhanced MR angiography and DSA. Respective sensitivity and specificity for detection of hemodynamically relevant stenosis relative to rotational angiography were 100% and 90% for contrast-enhanced MR angiography, 95.5% and 87.2% for 3D TOF MR angiography, and 88.6% and 100% for DSA. Four of 31 severe stenoses were underestimated at DSA, and three were underestimated at contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Three severe stenoses were underestimated at 3D TOF MR angiography, and one was misclassified as occluded. Of 13 moderate (50%-69%) stenoses, one was overestimated at contrast-enhanced MR angiography, two were underestimated and three overestimated at 3D TOF MR angiography, and two were underestimated at DSA. CONCLUSION: DSA results in an underestimation of ICA stenosis compared with rotational angiography. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography correlates best with rotational angiography.     

Peripheral arterial disease: gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography versus color-guided duplex US--a meta-analysis

PURPOSE: To summarize and compare the published data on gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography and color-guided duplex ultrasonography (US) for the work-up for peripheral arterial disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies published between January 1984 and November 1998 were included if (a) gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography and/or color-guided duplex US were performed for evaluation of arterial stenoses and occlusions in the work-up for peripheral arterial disease of the lower extremities, (b) conventional angiography was the reference standard, and (c) absolute numbers of true-positive, false-negative, true-negative, and false-positive results were available or derivable. RESULTS: With a random effects model, pooled sensitivity for MR angiography (97.5% [95% CI: 95.7%, 99.3%]) was higher than that for duplex US (87.6% [95% CI: 84.4%, 90.8%]). Pooled specificities were similar: 96.2% (95% CI: 94.4%, 97.9%) for MR angiography and 94.7% (95% CI: 93.2%, 96.2%) for duplex US. Summary receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated better discriminatory power for MR angiography than for duplex US. Regression coefficients for MR angiography versus US were 1.67 (95% CI: -0.23, 3.56) with adjustment for covariates, 2.11 (95% CI: 0.12, 4.09) without such adjustment, and 1.73 (95% CI: 0.44, 3.02) with a random effects model. CONCLUSION: Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography has better discriminatory power than does color-guided duplex US and is a highly sensitive and specific method, as compared with conventional angiography, for the work-up for peripheral arterial disease.     

Time-resolved three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the peripheral vessels

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of time-resolved three-dimensional contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with that of conventional angiography for imaging the lower extremity vasculature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-nine patients who were evaluated for possible surgical intervention underwent conventional angiography (ie, digital subtraction angiography [DSA]) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (ie, time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics [TRICKS]). Two independent, blinded readers evaluated vessel stenosis and occlusion at DSA and MR angiographic image readings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were analyzed with repeated-measures analysis of variance. The Cohen kappa test was performed to examine interreader variability. RESULTS: At pooled readings, contrast-enhanced MR angiography had a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 98% for detection of occlusion. For detection of significant stenosis (at least one > or = 50% stenosis), sensitivity and specificity were 77% and 91%, respectively. Interreader agreement was high for detection of both occlusion (kappa = 0.76) and significant stenosis (kappa = 0.68). Sensitivity increased as MR angiographic technical parameters were optimized. When improvements resulting from coil type and injection protocol were considered, the sensitivity and specificity of TRICKS MR angiography were 89% and 97%, respectively, for occlusion detection and 87% and 90%, respectively, for significant stenosis detection. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced TRICKS MR angiography is a feasible and minimally invasive means of acquiring angiograms of the peripheral vasculature with high sensitivity and specificity.     

Aortoiliac and renal arteries: prospective intraindividual comparison of contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography and multi-detector row CT angiography

PURPOSE: To compare contrast material-enhanced three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance (MR) angiography and multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography in the same patients for assessment of the aortoiliac and renal arteries, with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the standard of reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DSA, 3D MR angiography, and multi-detector row CT angiography were performed in 46 consecutive patients. A total of 769 arterial segments were analyzed for arterial stenosis by using a four-point grading system. Aneurysmal changes were noted. The time required for performing 3D reconstructions and image analysis of both MR and CT data sets was measured. Patient acceptance for each modality was assessed with a visual analogue scale. Statistical analysis of data was performed. RESULTS: Sensitivity of MR angiography for detection of hemodynamically significant arterial stenosis was 92% for reader 1 and 93% for reader 2, and specificity was 100% and 99%, respectively. Sensitivity of CT angiography was 91% for reader 1 and 92% for reader 2, and specificity was 99% and 99%, respectively. Differences between the two modalities were not significant. Interobserver and intermodality agreement was excellent (kappa = 0.88-0.90). The time for performance of 3D reconstruction and image analysis of CT data sets was significantly longer than that for MR data sets (P <.001). Patient acceptance was best for CT angiography (P =.016). CONCLUSION: There is no statistically significant difference between 3D MR angiography and multi-detector row CT angiography in the detection of hemodynamically significant arterial stenosis of the aortoiliac and renal arteries.     

Time-resolved MR angiography with generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition and time-resolved echo-sharing angiographic technique for hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas and grafts

PURPOSE: To evaluate the imaging of hemodialysis arteriovenous (AV) fistulas and grafts with use of magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) and time-resolved echo-sharing angiographic technique (TREAT) and compare the findings with those of digital subtraction angiography (DSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The vascular tree directly related to AV fistulas and grafts was divided into nine segments. Images of each segment obtained on GRAPPA MR angiography were evaluated for the presence of stenosis, occlusion, and any other disease (eg, pseudoaneurysm) by two independent observers and compared with a consensus reading of the same segments on DSA imaging. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with use of DSA as the gold standard modality, and each image on MR angiography and DSA was rated for quality. Linear-weighted kappa scores were calculated as a measure of interobserver variability in the detection of pathologic processes. RESULTS: A total of 80 segments were evaluated by each observer. For both observers, sensitivity rates for the detection of stenosis, occlusion, and any disease were 100% (95% CI, 52%-100%), 100% (95% CI, 20%-100%), and 100% (95% CI, 60%-100%), respectively. For observer 1, specificity rates for the detection of stenosis, occlusion, and any disease were 96% (95% CI, 88%-99%), 100% (95% CI, 94%-100%), and 96% (95% CI, 88%-99%), respectively. For observer 2, the specificity rates for the detection of stenosis, occlusion, and any disease were 93% (95% CI, 84%-98%), 100% (95% CI, 94%-100%), and 93% (95% CI, 84%-97%), respectively. Linear-weighted kappa values for MR angiography and DSA were 0.78+/-0.084 and 0.62+/-0.152, respectively. CONCLUSION: Time-resolved MR angiography with GRAPPA and TREAT offers excellent image quality and provides an accurate and reliable modality for the detection of pathologic processes in hemodialysis AV fistulas and grafts.     

Imaging of carotid arteries in symptomatic patients: cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies

PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of noninvasive imaging strategies in patients who have had a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke and are suspected of having significant carotid artery stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 through 2000, 350 patients were included in a multicenter blinded consecutive cohort study. The sensitivities and specificities of duplex ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, and these two examinations combined were estimated by using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. The actual costs (from a societal perspective) of performing imaging and endarterectomy were estimated. The survival, quality of life, and costs associated with stroke were based on data reported in the literature. Markov modeling was used to predict long-term outcomes. Subsequently, a decision model was used to calculate costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained for 62 examination-treatment strategies. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Duplex US had 88% sensitivity and 76% specificity with use of conventional cutoff criteria. MR angiography had comparable values: 92% sensitivity and 76% specificity. Combined concordant duplex US and MR angiography had superior diagnostic performance: 96% sensitivity and 80% specificity. Duplex US alone was the most efficient strategy. Adding MR angiography led to a marginal increase in QALYs gained but at prohibitive costs (cost-effectiveness ratio > 1 500 000 per QALY gained). Performing DSA owing to discordant duplex US and MR angiographic findings and to confirm duplex US and MR angiographic findings led to extra costs and QALY loss owing to complications. Sensitivity analyses revealed that duplex US as a stand-alone examination remained the preferred strategy while estimates and assumptions were varied across plausible ranges. CONCLUSION: Duplex US performed without additional imaging is cost-effective in the selection of symptomatic patients suitable for endarterectomy. Adding MR angiography increases effectiveness slightly at disproportionately high costs, whereas DSA is inferior because of associated complications.     

Isotropic high-spatial-resolution contrast-enhanced 3.0-T MR angiography in patients suspected of having renal artery stenosis

The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography performed at 3 T for assessment of renal artery stenosis (RAS) by using parallel acquisition techniques with high acceleration factors and with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. The study was institutional review board approved, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Twenty-nine patients (18 men, 11 women; mean age, 57.1 years +/- 14.3 [standard deviation]) suspected of having RAS underwent MR angiography. Images were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. The interobserver variability, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 3-T MR angiography, as compared with DSA (performed in 15 patients), were calculated. All examinations yielded good or excellent image quality. The sensitivity and specificity of MR angiography in grading significant (>75%) stenosis were 94% and 96%, respectively. Owing to its high sensitivity, contrast-enhanced 3-T MR angiography can be used reliably to exclude RAS and can serve as a useful screening method in the diagnostic work-up of patients with arterial hypertension.     

Supraaortic arteries: contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 3.0 T--highly accelerated parallel acquisition for improved spatial resolution over an extended field of view

PURPOSE: To prospectively use 3.0-T breath-hold high-spatial-resolution contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with highly accelerated parallel acquisition to image the supraaortic arteries of patients suspected of having arterial occlusive disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained for this HIPAA-compliant study. Eighty patients (44 men, 36 women; age range, 44-90 years) underwent contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the head and neck at 3.0 T with an eight-channel neurovascular array coil. By applying a generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition algorithm with an acceleration factor of four, high-spatial-resolution (0.7 x 0.7 x 0.9 mm = 0.44-mm(3) voxels) three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography was performed during a 20-second breath hold. Two neuroradiologists evaluated vascular image quality and arterial stenoses. Interobserver variability was tested with the kappa coefficient. Quantitation of stenosis at MR angiography was compared with that at digital subtraction angiography (DSA) (n = 13) and computed tomographic (CT) angiography (n = 12) with Spearman rank correlation coefficient (R(s)). RESULTS: Arterial stenoses were detected with contrast-enhanced MR angiography in 208 (reader 1) and 218 (reader 2) segments, with excellent interobserver agreement (kappa = 0.80). There was a significant correlation between contrast-enhanced MR angiography and CT angiography (R(s) = 0.95, reader 1; R(s) = 0.87, reader 2) and between contrast-enhanced MR angiography and DSA (R(s) = 0.94, reader 1; R(s) = 0.92, reader 2) for the degree of stenosis. Sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced MR angiography for detection of arterial stenoses greater than 50% were 94% and 98% for reader 1 and 100% and 98% for reader 2, with DSA as the standard of reference. Vascular image quality was sufficient for diagnosis or excellent for 97% of arterial segments evaluated. CONCLUSION: By using highly accelerated parallel acquisition, the described 3.0-T contrast-enhanced MR angiographic protocol enabled visualization and characterization of the majority of supraaortic arteries, with diagnostic or excellent image quality (97% of arterial segments) and diagnostic values comparable with those obtained by using CT angiography and DSA for detection of arterial stenoses.     

Interobserver agreement for the interpretation of contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography and MDCT angiography in peripheral arterial disease

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare interobserver agreement for interpretations of contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography and MDCT angiography in patients with peripheral arterial disease. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Of 226 eligible patients, 69 were excluded. The remaining 157 consecutive patients were prospectively randomized to either MR angiography (n = 78) or MDCT angiography (n = 79). Two observers independently evaluated for arterial stenosis or occlusion on MR angiography (2,157 segments) and MDCT angiography (2,419 segments) using a 5-point ordinal scale. Vessel wall calcifications were noted. Interobserver agreement for each technique was evaluated with a weighted kappa (kappa(w)) statistic. RESULTS: Although interobserver agreement for both was excellent, the interobserver agreement for MR angiography (kappa(w) = 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.92) was higher than that for MDCT angiography (kappa(w) = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.86) for reporting the degree of arterial stenosis or occlusion in all segments. For the different anatomic locations, the interobserver agreement for MR angiography versus MDCT angiography was as follows: aortoiliac (kappa(w) =0.91 vs 0.84, respectively), femoropopliteal (kappa(w) = 0.91 vs 0.87), and crural (kappa(w) = 0.90 vs 0.83) segments. The interobserver agreement of MDCT angiography significantly decreased in the presence of calcifications but was still good for all anatomic locations. The lowest agreement was found for crural segments in the presence of calcifications (kappa(w) = 0.67). With MR angiography, there were 12 times more nondiagnostic segments than with MDCT angiography (81 vs 7, respectively). CONCLUSION: Interpretations of MR angiography and MDCT angiography for peripheral arterial disease have an excellent interobserver agreement. MR angiography has a higher interobserver agreement than MDCT angiography, and the presence of calcified segments significantly decreases interobserver agreement for MDCT angiography.     

Peripheral arteries in diabetic patients: standard bolus-chase and time-resolved MR angiography

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the diagnostic performance of a combination of standard bolus-chase magnetic resonance (MR) angiography and MR angiography with time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics (TRICKS) for depicting severity of peripheral vascular disease of the lower extremity, including the pedal arteries, in diabetic patients with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An ethical committee approved this study; written informed consent was obtained from patients. Standard three-station and TRICKS MR angiography of the calf and foot were performed in 31 consecutive diabetic patients (23 men, eight women; mean age, 67 years; range, 43-81 years). Two readers separately assessed images of arterial segments as diagnostic or nondiagnostic and graded stenosis. Results were compared with those at DSA when the corresponding arterial segments were considered diagnostic at DSA. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine if a significant difference between imaging techniques existed, and kappa statistics were used to determine interobserver agreement. RESULTS: The difference between standard MR angiography and DSA regarding the number of diagnostic segments in the thigh was not significant (P = .50). A significantly higher number of calf and foot segments was considered diagnostic at TRICKS MR angiography than at standard MR angiography (P < .025). Sixteen of 26 segments in the foot that were considered nondiagnostic at DSA were considered diagnostic at TRICKS MR angiography. Average sensitivity of standard MR angiography for depicting hemodynamically significant arterial stenosis was 84% (reader 1) and 83% (reader 2) in the thigh and 78% (reader 1) and 80% (reader 2) in the calf. For both readers, average specificity was 97% in the thigh and 90% in the calf. Sensitivity and specificity of TRICKS MR angiography in the calf and foot were improved compared with those at standard MR angiography. CONCLUSION: TRICKS MR angiography of the distal calf and pedal vessels is superior to standard MR angiography regarding the number of diagnostic segments and assessment of the degree of luminal narrowing.     

Renal artery assessment with nonenhanced steady-state free precession versus contrast-enhanced MR angiography

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess the diagnostic accuracy of nonenhanced three-dimensional (3D) steady-state free precession (SSFP) magnetic resonance (MR) angiography for detection of renal artery stenosis (RAS), with breath-hold contrast material-enhanced MR angiography performed as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was local ethics committee approved; all patients gave written informed consent. Fifty-three patients (30 male, 23 female; mean age, 58 years) with arterial hypertension and suspected of having RAS were examined with 1.5-T 3D SSFP renal MR angiography. Stenosis grade, maximal visible vessel length, and subjective image quality were compared. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated on artery-by-artery and patient-by-patient bases. The significance of the results was assessed with the paired two-sided t test for continuous variables and with the marginal homogeneity test for categorical variables. Cohen kappa statistics were used to estimate interobserver agreement. RESULTS: One hundred eight renal arteries with 20 significant (>or=50%) stenoses were detected with contrast-enhanced MR angiography. At artery-by-artery analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and NPV of nonenhanced SSFP MR angiography for RAS detection were 100%, 93%, 94%, and 100%, respectively, for observer 1 and 95%, 95%, 95%, and 99%, respectively, for observer 2. Corresponding patient-by-patient values were 100%, 92%, 94%, and 100%, respectively, for observer 1 and 100%, 95%, 96%, and 100%, respectively, for observer 2. Overestimation of stenosis grade with SSFP MR angiography resulted in six and four false-positive findings for readers 1 and 2, respectively. Mean maximal visible lengths of the renal arteries were 69.9 mm at contrast-enhanced MR angiography and 61.1 mm at SSFP MR angiography (P<.001). Both techniques yielded good to excellent image quality. CONCLUSION: Slab-selective inversion-prepared 3D SSFP MR angiography had high sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and NPV for RAS detection, without the need for contrast material. However, RAS severity was overestimated in some patients.     

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in the evaluation of peripheral bypass grafts

The aim of this study was to determine the potential of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography in the evaluation of peripheral bypass grafts. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) served as a standard of reference. Thirty-five patients with previous bypass graft surgery underwent DSA and contrast-enhanced MR angiography within 2 weeks. MR angiography was performed using a three-dimensional fast gradient-echo sequence after administration of gadopentetate dimeglumine. Every leg was divided into 11 segments and scored in five categories of stenosis. MR angiography findings were compared with those of DSA. A total of 38 bypass grafts and 454 segments in 27 patients were included in the evaluation. In 33 (87 %) bypass grafts stenosis grading with both methods corresponded, and in 5 (13 %) cases stenosis was overestimated on MR angiography. Agreement in detection of hemodynamically significant stenosis (stenosis = 50 %) was 94.7 % with a sensitivity of 100 % and a specificity of 91.3 %. In 340 (83.0 %) vascular segments there was conformity in graduation, in 69 (16.88 %), there was a difference of one or more grades on MR angiograms. Forty-four segments (9.6 %) were not assessable due to technical limitations. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography is an useful noninvasive tool in the detection of failing peripheral vascular bypass grafts. Received: 6 July 1999; Revised: 12 November 1999; Accepted: 4 January 2000     

Magnetic resonance angiography in the follow-up of distal lower-extremity bypass surgery: comparison with duplex ultrasound and digital subtraction angiography

PURPOSE: The danger of limb loss as a consequence of acute occlusion of infrapopliteal bypasses underscores the requirement for careful patient follow-up. The objective of this study was to determine the agreement and accuracy of contrast material-enhanced moving-table magnetic resonance (MR) angiography and duplex ultrasonography (US) in the assessment of failing bypass grafts. In cases of discrepancy, digital subtraction angiography (DSA) served as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR angiography was performed in 24 consecutive patients with 26 femorotibial or femoropedal bypass grafts. Each revascularized limb was divided into five segments--(i) native arteries proximal to the graft; (ii) proximal anastomosis; (iii) graft course; (iv) distal anastomosis; and (v) native arteries distal to the graft-resulting in 130 vascular segments. Three readers evaluated all MR angiograms for image quality and the presence of failing grafts. The degree of stenosis was compared to the findings of duplex US, and in case of discrepancy, to DSA findings. Two separate analyses were performed with use of DSA only and a combined diagnostic endpoint as the reference standard. RESULTS: Image quality was rated excellent or intermediate in 119 of 130 vascular segments (92%). Venous overlay was encountered in 26 of 130 segments (20%). In only two segments was evaluation of the outflow region not feasible. One hundred seventeen of 130 vascular segments were available for quantitative analysis. In 109 of 117 segments (93%), MR angiography and duplex US showed concordant findings. In the eight discordant segments in seven patients, duplex US overlooked four high-grade stenoses that were correctly identified by MR angiography and confirmed by DSA. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty was performed in these cases. In no case did MR angiography miss an area of stenosis of sufficient severity to require treatment. Total accuracy for duplex US ranged from 0.90 to 0.97 depending on the reference standard used, whereas MR angiography was completely accurate (1.00) regardless of the standard definition. CONCLUSION: Our data strongly suggest that the accuracy of MR angiography for identifying failing grafts in the infrapopliteal circulation is equal to that of duplex US and superior to that of duplex US in cases of complex revascularization. MR angiography should be included in routine follow-up of patients undergoing infrapopliteal bypass surgery.     

Time-resolved contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid arteries: diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer variability compared with selective catheter angiography

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) in a time-resolved technique compared with digital subtraction angiography (x-ray DSA) in patients with suspected stenoses of the internal carotid artery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 43 patients were enrolled in this prospective study. All patients underwent selective x-ray DSA involving a total of 84 carotid arteries. CE-MRA was performed in a time-resolved technique with a fast gradient-echo sequence on a 1.5 T MR scanner: TR 3.8 milliseconds, TE 1.49 milliseconds. Four consecutive measurements, each a duration of 10 seconds, were performed with omission of measuring bolus transit time. Four independent radiologists scored the degree of stenosis. The interobserver variability was calculated for CE-MRA and x-ray DSA. RESULTS: In the 43 cases, at least one MRA measurement showed arterial contrast without venous degradation. Compared with x-ray DSA the mean sensitivity and specificity for grading stenosis > or = 70% were 98% and 86%, respectively. The interobserver agreement was substantial with no significant difference between CE-MRA (kappa value 0.794) and x-ray DSA (kappa value 0.786). CONCLUSIONS: The short acquisition time of a fast CE-MRA sequence allows a selective visualization of the internal carotid arteries without degradation from venous enhancement. It is a reliable method with a good interobserver agreement.     

Evaluation of carotid artery stenosis: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography compared with conventional digital subtraction angiography.

OBJECTIVE: To compare retrospectively high-resolution contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography with centric k-space filling and digital subtraction angiography in the assessment of degree of carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: Two neuroradiologists independently evaluated 14 carotid arteries (in 7 patients), and the degree of carotid stenosis determined was compared to calculate interobserver reliability. Thirty-six carotid arteries (in 18 patients) were then assessed with both contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and digital subtraction angiography. The degree of stenosis was determined by consensus, and the findings of the 2 modalities were compared. RESULTS: Close interobserver agreement was found with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.95-0.99). Sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 91% were found for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography detection of surgically significant carotid stenosis compared with digital subtraction angiography. The Spearman rank correlation test also found a significant correlation (R(s) = 0.90, p < 0.001) in the comparison of the classifications of degree of carotid artery stenosis. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography shows excellent correlation with digital subtraction angiography for the evaluation of carotid artery disease and has the potential to replace it in the assessment of degree of carotid artery stenosis.