Subtracted 3D CT angiography for evaluation of internal carotid artery aneurysms: comparison with conventional digital subtraction angiography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: 3D computed tomographic angiography (3DCTA) has been used recently for the evaluation of intracerebral aneurysms, but it is difficult to use this technique to visualize aneurysms near the base of the skull because of the presence of bone. Subtracted 3DCTA could replace digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for evaluation of aneurysms near the base of the skull if the 2 methods were to give similar results. The aim of this study was to compare the evaluation of aneurysms of the internal carotid artery (ICA) near the base of the skull by subtracted 3DCTA and DSA. METHODS: CTA and DSA were obtained in 25 patients with unruptured aneurysms of the ICA. To create subtracted 3DCTA images, we used a volume subtraction (VS) method, wherein nonenhanced volume data are subtracted from enhanced volume data. CTA and DSA were reviewed by 2 neuroradiologists who performed the detection and characterization of aneurysms of the ICA by using 2D multiplanar reformatted (MPR) and VS- and nonsubtracted (NS)-3DCTA images with volume rendering techniques. RESULTS: DSA detected 29 aneurysms in the 25 patients. VS-3DCTA detected all 29 aneurysms in the 25 patients and was equivalent to DSA for evaluating their characteristics (location, size, and direction). NS-3DCTA detected 19 (1 cavernous, 4 ophthalmic, 1 superior hypophyseal, 7 posterior communicating, and 6 anterior choroidal artery) of these 29 aneurysms, but it could not characterize ophthalmic and superior hypophyseal artery aneurysms because they were only partly visible on NS-3DCTA because of bony structures. 2D-MPR images detected all but the small aneurysms (24 of 29 detected). VS-3DCTA and 2D-MPR could visualize all branching arteries (ophthalmic, posterior communicating, and anterior choroidal) detected by DSA, but NS-3DCTA could not visualize ophthalmic arteries because of the presence of bony structures. CONCLUSION: VS-3DCTA can be used as an alternative to DSA for preoperative examination of aneurysms near the skull base, where it provides equivalent identification and characterization.     

Non-selective digital subtraction angiography in comparison with selective conventional angiography in the diagnosis of carotid artery disease

In the recent past, non-selective arterial digital subtraction angiography (NSDSA) seemed a less invasive alternative to conventional filmscreen angiography (CFA) in the diagnosis of carotid artery disease. NSDSA obviated the need for selective catheterization with its associated risks but yet took advantage of the DSA method. However, this technique has not found general application although there are no reports that formally assess the (dis)advantages of NSDSA. The aim of our study was to compare the reliability of NSDSA with CFA in evaluation of carotid bifurcations in patients with transient ischemic attacks or partial stroke by reviewing prospectively collected data. Over a 2-year period, 40 patients (upper age limit 65 years) underwent both NSDSA and CFA. Bilateral NSDSA was performed in all 40 patients (80 bifurcations). Bilateral CFA was performed in 27 patients whereas unilateral CFA was carried out in 13 patients (67 bifurcations). Inter- and intra-observer variability for the degree of stenosis was determined by calculation of kappa-values for a 4-point and a 2-point scale. The proportion of interpretable studies was significantly lower in NSDSA. The inter- and intra-observer agreement was on average better in CFA examinations, though the difference was only statistically significant for the inter-observer agreement. The results of our study indicate that images obtained with NSDSA give less reliable information about carotid artery disease than images obtained with CFA. This is in accordance with the fact that NSDSA now seems an abandoned technique.     

Contrast-enhanced MR angiography vs intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography for carotid imaging: activity-based cost analysis

The aim of this study was to compare the costs of performing contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE MRA) with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for the evaluation of carotid atherosclerotic disease. Activity-based cost analysis was used to identify the costs of performing each procedure. The variable direct costs of performing CE MRA and DSA were determined in 20 patients by using detailed time and motion studies. All personnel directly involved in the cases were tracked to the nearest minute and all consumable items used were recorded. Moreover, procedure times were prospectively recorded for an additional 80 patients who underwent both DSA and CE MRA. The variable direct costs of bed usage in the angiography day-case unit, all direct fixed costs as well as indirect costs were assessed from hospital and departmental accounting records. Total costs for each procedure were calculated and compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test. Mean aggregate costs were €721 for DSA and €306 for CE MRA, resulting in potential savings of €415 per patient (p<0.0001). On average, a DSA procedure thus cost approximately 2.4 (95% confidence intervals: 2.2–2.6) times more than CE MRA to our medical institution. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of our conclusions across wide ranges of plausible values for various parameters. Assuming equal diagnostic performance, institutions may have substantial cost savings if CE MRA is used instead of DSA for carotid imaging.     

三维增强磁共振血管成像和数字减影血管造影在颈部动脉狭窄闭塞性病变中的对比分析

目的 评价三维增强磁共振血管成像(3D-CE-MRA)诊断颈部动脉狭窄闭塞性病变的准确性及应用价值.方法 对43例可疑颈部动脉狭窄或闭塞的患者分别先后进行3D-CE-MRA和数字减影血管造影(DSA)检查,对成像结果进行对比研究.结果 与DSA相比,3D-CE-MRA 对颈部动脉狭窄闭塞性病变诊断的敏感度为83.0%,特异度为94.1%.结论 3D-CE-MRA对颈部动脉狭窄闭塞性病变的显示具有独特的优势,是一种无创、安全、快速、准确性高的检查方法,可以作为首选的检查方法.     

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.     

3D cerebral angiography: radiation dose comparison with digital subtraction angiography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: As the use of 3D rotational angiography (3D RA) for the evaluation of cerebral vasculature becomes more widespread, it is important to evaluate this imaging method's effect on patient radiation dose. The purpose of the study is to measure 3D RA radiation dose as compared with biplanar digital subtraction angiography (DSA). METHODS: The distribution and peak skin dose were measured for 3D RA and biplanar DSA by using an anthropomorphic skull phantom. In addition, the cumulative incident dose, summed over all images in each acquisition, was determined. Measurements were acquired for our facility's standard 3D RA acquisition mode (25 degrees /s rotational speed; 162 total frames) and other available acquisition mode selections. RESULTS: For 3D RA, the skin dose was found to be distributed across the back and sides of the skull with the peak skin dose located at the center of the back of the skull. The peak skin dose for the standard 3D RA acquisition mode was 15 mGy. For a biplanar DSA run, the peak skin dose was 58 mGy, also located at the back of the skull. The cumulative incident dose for the standard 3D RA acquisition mode was 33 mGy, compared with 53 mGy for biplanar DSA. CONCLUSION: The patient radiation dose for 3D RA is significantly lower than for biplanar DSA, by nearly a factor of 4 in peak skin dose and 40% lower in cumulative incident dose.     

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.     

Diabetes and peripheral arterial occlusive disease: prospective comparison of contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography with conventional digital subtraction angiography

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography with conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for identifying and evaluating arteries of the distal calf and foot in diabetic patients with severe arterial occlusive disease who will undergo distal bypass surgery. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four feet of 24 consecutive patients with diabetes and limb-threatening lower extremity ischemia were prospectively imaged using an ultrafast three-dimensional fast low-angle shot sequence on a 1.5-T MR scanner. All patients also underwent DSA of the diseased extremity within 5 days. Images were interpreted in a randomized manner by two observers in conference. Each lower extremity was divided into seven potential arterial segments. Image analysis included the detection of patent, stenosed, or occluded vessel segments. A vascular surgeon formulated treatment plans on the basis of findings from DSA and then formulated treatment plans on the basis of findings from both DSA and MR angiography. RESULTS: MR angiography was significantly better than DSA in revealing peripheral runoff vessels (p < 0.001). In nine (38%) of the 24 patients, MR angiography showed patent pedal vessels suitable for distal bypass grafting that were not revealed by DSA. Because of the results of MR angiography, treatment plans changed in seven of the nine patients in whom patent vessels were subsequently used as target vessels for distal pedal bypass grafts. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography is superior to DSA in revealing patent vessel segments of the foot in diabetic patients with severe arterial occlusive disease. Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography should be part of the diagnostic algorithm for patients in whom pedal bypass grafting is a therapeutic option.     

Intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas: evaluation with combined 3D time-of-flight MR angiography and MR digital subtraction angiography

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic utility of 3D time-of-flight (TOF) MR angiography and MR digital subtraction angiography in patients with angiographically proven moderate- to high-flow intracranial dural arteriovenous fistula. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two neuroradiologists, unaware of patients' histories and angiographic findings, retrospectively reviewed 17 MR angiograms with 3D TOF MR angiography and MR digital subtraction angiography in 15 patients with dural arteriovenous fistula and also reviewed 35 MR angiograms in control patients without findings of dural arteriovenous fistula on angiography. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: In patients with dural arteriovenous fistula, source images of 3D TOF MR angiography showed two abnormal findings: multiple high-intensity curvilinear or nodular structures adjacent to the sinus wall and high-intensity areas in the venous sinus. Findings of multiple high-intensity structures adjacent to the sinus wall were observed in all cases of dural arteriovenous fistula. Findings of high-intensity areas in the venous sinus were observed in 13 of 17 cases of dural arteriovenous fistula. Findings of multiple high-intensity structures adjacent to the sinus wall were not observed in any control subjects. Findings of high-intensity areas within the venous sinus were observed in five of 35 control subjects. Findings of MR digital subtraction angiography showed early filling of the venous sinus, suggestive of dural arteriovenous fistula, in 13 of 15 patients with dural arteriovenous fistula. Sensitivity and specificity of multiple high-intensity structures adjacent to the sinus wall, high-intensity areas in the venous sinus, and early filling of the venous sinus were 100% and 100%, 76% and 86%, and 87% and 100%, respectively. Although 3D TOF MR angiography failed to show the findings of retrograde cortical venous drainage and venous sinus occlusion, MR digital subtraction angiography clearly showed both findings in all five subjects. CONCLUSION: A protocol including both 3D TOF MR angiography (source images) and MR digital subtraction angiography allowed the diagnosis of moderate- to high-flow dural arteriovenous fistula. In addition, cortical venous drainage was reliably noted in a small subset of patients.     

Prospective evaluation of carotid artery stenosis: elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography and spiral CT angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although digital subtraction angiography (DSA) is the reference standard for assessing carotid arteries, it is uncomfortable for patients and has a small risk of disabling stroke and death. These problems have fueled the use of spiral CT angiography and MR angiography. We prospectively compared elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography and spiral CT angiography with conventional DSA for detecting carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: Eighty carotid arteries (in 40 symptomatic patients) were assessed. Elliptic centric MR and spiral CT angiographic data were reconstructed with maximum intensity projection and multiplanar reconstruction techniques. All patients had been referred for DSA evaluation on the basis of findings at Doppler sonography, which served as a screening method (degree of stenosis > or = 70% or inconclusive results). Degree of carotid stenosis estimated by using the three modalities was compared. RESULTS: Significant correlation with DSA was found for stenosis degree for both elliptic centric MR and spiral CT angiography; however, the correlation coefficient was higher for MR than for CT angiography (r = 0.98 vs r = 0.86). Underestimation of stenoses of 70-99% occurred in one case with elliptic centric MR angiography (a 70% stenosis was underestimated as 65%) and in nine cases with spiral CT angiography, in comparison to DSA findings. Overestimation occurred in two cases with MR angiography (stenoses of 65-67% were overestimated as 70-75%). With CT, overestimation occurred in seven cases; a stenosis of 60% in one case was overestimated as 70%. Both techniques confirmed the three cases of carotid occlusion. With elliptic centric MR angiography, carotid stenoses of 70% or greater were detected with high sensitivity, 97.1%; specificity, 95.2%; likelihood ratio (LR) for a positive test result, 20.4; and ratio of LR(+) to LR(-), -0.3. With spiral CT angiography, sensitivity, specificity, LR(+), and LR(+):LR(-) were 74.3%, 97.6%, 31.2, and 0.3, respectively. CONCLUSION: Elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography is more accurate than spiral CT angiography to adequately evaluate carotid stenosis. Furthermore, elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography appears to be adequate to replace conventional DSA in most patients examined.     

Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with detachable coils: comparison of gadolinium-enhanced 3D time-of-flight MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography

PURPOSE: To compare three-dimensional (3D) time-of-flight magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with selective endovascular placement of detachable coils. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight consecutive patients with intracranial aneurysms were included in the prospective study. The goal was to evaluate 3D time-of-flight MR angiography versus DSA for the detection of a residual aneurysm neck or residual flow inside the coil mesh. RESULTS: Eighty-one MR angiographic and 83 DSA examinations were performed; 15 patients were examined with both modalities twice. MR angiography was not possible in two patients. In another patient, the quality of MR angiography was not sufficient to assess the treated aneurysm. In 72 of the remaining 80 MR angiographic and DSA examinations, there was good correlation between the two modalities. In 54 cases, neither image type showed remnants or recurrence, but in 18, both showed residual aneurysm. In eight cases, the MR angiographic and DSA results differed. In one of these cases, MR angiography depicted residual aneurysm but DSA depicted an arterial loop. In seven cases, a small (<3-mm) remnant was not detected at MR angiography. CONCLUSION: Because very small aneurysm remnants or recurrences probably are not clinically important, MR angiography is an option for following up intracranial aneurysms treated with detachable coils and may partly replace DSA.     

Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the carotid artery using 3D time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics: comparison with real-time fluoroscopic triggered 3D-elliptical centric view ordering

PURPOSE: To evaluate contrast-enhanced MR angiography using the 3D time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics technique (3D-TRICKS) by direct comparison with the fluoroscopic triggered 3D-elliptical centric view ordering (3D-ELLIP) technique. METHODS: 3D-TRICKS and 3D-ELLIP were directly compared on a 1.5-Tesla MR unit using the same spatial resolution and matrix. In 3D-TRICKS, the central part of the k-space is updated more frequently than the peripheral part of the k-space, which is divided in the slice-encoding direction. The carotid arteries were imaged using 3D-TRICKS and 3D-ELLIP sequentially in 14 patients. Temporal resolution was 12 sec for 3D-ELLIP and 6 sec for 3D-TRICKS. The signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the common carotid artery was measured, and the quality of MIP images was then scored in terms of venous overlap and blurring of vessel contours. RESULTS: No significant difference in mean S/N was seen between the two methods. Significant venous overlap was not seen in any of the patients examined. Moderate blurring of vessel contours was noted on 3D-TRICKS in five patients and on 3D-ELLIP in four patients. Blurring in the slice-encoding direction was slightly more pronounced in 3D-TRICKS. However, qualitative analysis scores showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION: When the spatial resolution of the two methods was identical, the performance of 3D-TRICKS was found to be comparable in static visualization of the carotid arteries with 3D-ELLIP, although blurring in the slice-encoding direction was slightly more pronounced in 3D-TRICKS. 3D-TRICKS is a more robust technique than 3D-ELLIP, because 3D-ELLIP requires operator-dependent fluoroscopic triggering. Furthermore, 3D-TRICKS can achieve higher temporal resolution. For the spatial resolution employed in this study, 3D-TRICKS may be the method of choice.     

Multidirectional depiction of internal carotid arterial stenosis: three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography versus rotational and conventional digital subtraction angiography

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether and to what extent greater number of projection images obtained at three-dimensional (3D) time-of-flight (TOF) magnetic resonance (MR) angiography versus conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) causes overestimation of internal carotid arterial (ICA) stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DSA (two or three projections), rotational angiography (16 or 32 projections), and 3D TOF MR angiography (12 projections) were performed in 47 stenotic ICAs of 38 symptomatic patients. Two observers independently measured maximum stenosis, and the mean differences among MR angiography, DSA, and rotational angiography were compared. RESULTS: Three rotational and five MR angiograms were nondiagnostic. Seven MR angiograms of ICA stenoses showed a signal void and were excluded from analysis. On the remaining 32 angiograms, mean differences in maximum stenosis for observers 1 and 2, respectively, were 7% (95% CI: 3%, 12%) and 8% (95% CI: 3%, 13%) at MR angiography versus DSA and 2% (95% CI: -2%, 7%) and -1% (95% CI: -5%, 3%) at MR angiography versus rotational angiography. ICA stenosis was graded significantly higher at MR angiography versus DSA, whereas, it was not overestimated at MR angiography versus rotational angiography. The difference in maximum stenosis at MR angiography versus DSA was significantly different from that of MR angiography versus rotational angiography. CONCLUSION: Apparent overestimation of ICA stenosis at 3D TOF MR angiography versus conventional DSA may be partly explained by the greater number of projection images available at 3D TOF MR angiography.     

Internal carotid artery stenosis: accuracy of subjective visual impression for evaluation with digital subtraction angiography and contrast-enhanced MR angiography

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine, for both digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, the accuracy of subjective visual impression (SVI) in the evaluation of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis, with objective caliper measurements serving as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Local ethics committee approval and written informed patient consent were obtained. A total of 142 symptomatic patients (41 women, 101 men; mean age, 70 years; age range, 44-89 years) suspected of having ICA stenosis on the basis of Doppler ultrasonographic findings underwent both DSA and contrast-enhanced MR angiography. With each modality, three independent neuroradiologists who were blinded to other test results first visually estimated and subsequently objectively measured stenoses. Diagnostic accuracy and percentage misclassification for correct categorization of 70%-99% stenosis were calculated for SVI, with objective measurements serving as the reference standard. Interobserver variability was determined with kappa statistics. RESULTS: After exclusion of arteries that were unsuitable for measurement, 180 vessels remained for analysis with DSA and 159 vessels remained for analysis with contrast-enhanced MR angiography. With respect to 70%-99% stenosis, SVI was associated with average misclassification of 8.9% for DSA (8.9%, 7.8%, and 10.0% for readers A, B, and C, respectively) and of 11.7% for contrast-enhanced MR angiography (11.3%, 8.8%, and 15.1% for readers A, B, and C, respectively). Negative predictive values were excellent (92.3%-100%). Interobserver variability was higher for SVI (DSA, kappa = 0.62-0.71; contrast-enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.57-0.69) than for objective measurements (DSA, kappa = 0.75-0.80; contrast-enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.66-0.72). CONCLUSION: SVI alone is not recommended for evaluation of ICA stenosis with both DSA and contrast-enhanced MR angiography. SVI may be acceptable as an initial screening tool to exclude the presence of 70%-99% stenosis, but caliper measurements are warranted to confirm the presence of such stenosis.