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

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 37, Issue 10, 2002, Pages 535-541

  Lenhart, Markus ^a   Framme, Nicola ^a   Völk, Markus ^a   Strotzer, Michael ^a   Manke, Christoph ^a   Nitz, Wolfgang R ^a   Finkenzeller, Thomas ^a   Feuerbach, Stefan ^a   Link, Johann ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL REGENSBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Carotid arteries; MR Carotid arteries; Stenosis or obstruction Magnetic Resonance (MR); Vascular studies

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CAROTID ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CATHETERIZATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL OBSERVATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNAL CAROTID ARTERY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TIME; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS;

EID: 0036785929     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200210000-00001     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Broderick J, Brott T, Kothari R, et al. The Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Stroke Study: preliminary first-ever and total incidence rates of stroke among blacks. Stroke 1998;29:415-421.
2. North. Am symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 1991;325:445-453.
3. European, carotid surgery trialists' collaborative group. MRC European Carotid surgery trial: interim results for symptomatic patients with severe (70-99%) and with mild (0-29%) carotid stenosis. Lancet 1991;337:1235-1243.
4. Cloft HJ, Murphy KJ, Prince MR, et al. 3D gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the carotid arteries. Magn Reson Imaging 1996;14: 593-600.
5. Prince MR. Gadolinium-enhanced MR aortography. Radiology 1994; 191:155-164.
6. Kim JK, Farb RI, Wright GA. Test bolus examination in the carotid artery at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 1998;206:283-289.
7. Landis RJ, Koch GG. The measurement observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-174.
8. Levy RA, Prince MR. Arterial-phase three-dimensional contrast enhanced MR angiography of the carotid arteries. AJR 1996;167:211-215.
9. Fellner FA, Fellner C, Wutke R, et al. Fluoroscopically triggered contrast-enhanced 3D MR DSA and 3D time-of-flight turbo MRA of the carotid arteries: first clinical experiences in correlation with ultrasound, x-ray angiography, and endarterectomy findings. Magn Reson Imaging 2000;18:575-585.
10. Huston J 3rd, Fain SB, Wald JT, et al. Carotid artery: elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography compared with conventional angiography. Radiology 2001;218:138-143.
11. Korosec FR, Frayne R, Grist TM, et al. Time-resolved contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:345-351.
12. Levy RA, Maki JH. Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the extracranial carotid arteries: two techniques. Am J Neuroradiol 1998;19:688-690.
13. Völk M, Strotzer M, Lenhart M, et al. Time-resolved contrast-enhanced MR angiography of renal artery stenosis: diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability. AJR 2000;174:1583-1588.
14. Carroll TJ, Korosec FR, Petermann GM, et al. Carotid bifurcation: evaluation of time-resolved three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 2001;220:525-532.
15. Golay X, Brown SJ, Itoh J, et al. Time-resolved contrast-enhanced carotid MR angiography using sensitivity encoding (SENSE). AJNR 2001;22:1615-1619.
16. Winterer JT, Ennker J, Scheffler K, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced elliptically reordered three-dimensional MR angiography in the assessment of hand vascularization before radial artery harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: first experience. Invest Radiol 2001; 36:501-508.
17. Elgersma OE, Wust AF, Buijs PC, et al. Multidirectional depiction of internal carotid arterial stenosis: three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography versus rotational and conventional digital subtraction angiography. Radiology 2000;216:511-516.
18. Leclerc X, Nicol L, Gauvrit JY, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR. angiography of supraaortic vessels: the effect of voxel size on image quality. Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:1021-1027.
19. Melhem ER, Serfaty JM, Jones L, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR. angiography: the effects of k-space truncation on luminal representation in a carotid artery phantom model. Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21:1028-1031.
20. Barnett HJ, Taylor DW, Eliasziw M, et al. Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis. North Am Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1415-1425.
21. Grzyska U, Freitag J, Zeumer H. Selective cerebral intra-arterial DSA. Complication rate and control of risk factors. Neuroradiology 1990; 32:296-299.
22. Waugh JR Sacharias N. Arteriographic complications in the DSA era. Radiology 1992;182:243-246.
23. Slosman F, Stolpen AH, Lexa FJ, et al. Extracranial atherosclerotic carotid artery disease: evaluation of non-breath-hold three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. AJR 1998;170:489-495.
24. Willig DS, Turski PA, Frayne R, et al. Contrast-enhanced 3D MR DSA. of the carotid artery bifurcation: preliminary study of comparison with unenhanced 2D and 3D time-of-flight MR Angiography. Radiology 1998;208:447-451.
25. Randoux B, Marro B, Koskas F, et al. Carotid artery stenosis: prospective comparison of CT, three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR, and conventional angiography. Radiology 2001 Jul; 220:179-185.
26. Chikos PM, Fisher LD, Hirsch JH, et al. Observer variability in evaluatng extracranial carotid artery stenosis. Stroke 1993;14:885-892.
27. Gilfeather M, Yoon HC, Siegelmann ES, et al. Renal artery stenosis: evaluation with conventional angiography versus gadolinum-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 1999;210:367-372.