The capability of inflow inversion recovery magnetic resonance compared to contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance in renal artery angiography

Purpose

To assess the capability of inflow inversion recovery (IFIR) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), compared with contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) as reference standard, in evaluating renal artery stenosis (RAS).

Methods

Seventy-two subjects were examined by IFIR MRA with respiratory-gated, prior to CE-MRA with a 1.5-T scanner. Two readers evaluated the quality of IFIR MRA images and renal artery depiction on artery-by-artery basis. The agreement of two methods to assess RAS was analyzed using the Kappa test. The relationship between image quality of IFIR MRA and respiratory rate was analyzed by ANOVA test.

Results

The visibility of renal artery branch vessels was significantly higher using IFIR MRA than CE-MRA (p < 0.05). A good agreement of two methods in evaluating stenosis grade, and a near-perfect inter-observer agreement for IFIR MRA (Kappa value 0.98) and CE-MRA (Kappa value 0.93), were demonstrated. As RAS ≥50%, the sensitivity and specificity of IFIR MRA were 92 and 98% in reader 1, 93 and 98% in reader 2, respectively. The image quality was significantly better in patients with stable respiration (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

IFIR MRA in patients with stable respiration has higher visibility of renal artery branch vessels than CE-MRA, and a good agreement with CE-MRA in evaluating stenosis grade. It could be used to evaluate RAS for screening, and monitoring treatment.