Evaluation of in-stent stenosis by magnetic resonance phase-velocity mapping in nickel-titanium stents

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 248-257

  Holton, Andrea D ^a   Walsh, Edward G ^a   Brott, Brigitta C ^b   Venugopalan, Ramakrishna ^c   Hershey, Bradley ^a   Ito, Yasushi ^d   Shih, Alan ^d   Koomullil, Roy ^d   Anayiotos, Andreas S ^a  

^a and Radiation Oncology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

^d University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD); Hemodynamics; In stent restenosis; MRI; Phase velocity mapping

Indexed keywords

NICKEL; TITANIUM;

ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; CAROTID ARTERY; COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS; CORONARY ARTERY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMORAL ARTERY; GEOMETRY; HEMODYNAMICS; ILIAC ARTERY; IN-STENT RESTENOSIS; INSTRUMENTATION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE PHASE VELOCITY MAPPING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OPTICAL RESOLUTION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RESTENOSIS;

CONSTRICTION, PATHOLOGIC; CORONARY CIRCULATION; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, CINE; MODELS, ANATOMIC; NICKEL; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PULSATILE FLOW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STENTS; TITANIUM; VASCULAR RESISTANCE;

EID: 22944436551     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20380     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. El-Omar MM, Dangas G, Iakovou I, Mehran R. Update on in-stent restenosis. Curr Intervent Cardiol Rep 2001;3:296-305.
2. de Feyter PJ, Kay P, Disco C, Serruys PW. Reference chart derived from post-stent implantation intravascular ultrasound predictors of 6-month expected restenosis on quantitative coronary angiography. Circulation 1999;100:1777-1783.
3. Moscucci M, Muller DWM. Restenosis. In: Freed M, Grines C, Safian RD, editors. The new manual of interventional cardiology. Royal Oak, MI: Physicians Press. 1996: 431-433,
4. Ringer AJ, German JW, Guterman LR, Hopkins LN. Follow-up of stented carotid arteries by Doppler ultrasound. Neurosurgery 2002;51:639-643.
5. Christiaans MH, Ernst JM, Suttorp MJ, et al. Restenosis after carotid angioplasty and stenting: a follow-up study with duplex ultrasonography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2003;26:141-144.
6. Faxon DP. Catheterization and angiography. In: Goldman L, Bennett JC, editors. Textbook of medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Cecil; 2000. p 204-205.
7. Kern MJ. Curriculum in interventional cardiology: coronary pressure and flow measurements in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2001;54:378-400.
8. Topol EJ, Nissen SE. Our preoccupation with coronary luminology: the dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 1995;92:2333-2342.
9. Buecker A, Spuentrup E, Ruebben A, Gunther RW. Artifact-free in-stent lumen visualization by standard magnetic resonance angiography using new metallic magnetic resonance imaging stent. Circulation 2002;105:1772-1775.
10. Kuehne T, Saeed M, Reddy G, et al. Sequential magnetic resonance monitoring of pulmonary flow with endovascular stents placed across the pulmonary valve in growing swine. Circulation 2001; 104:2363-2368.
11. Nagel E, Thouet T, Klien C, et al. Noninvasive determination of coronary blood flow velocity with cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients after stent deployment. Circulation 2003;107: 1738-1743.
12. Mehran R, Dangas G, Abizaid AS, et al. Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis: classifications and implications for long-term outcome. Circulation 1999;100:1872-1878.
13. Holton AD, Walsh EG, Venugopalan R, Anayiotos AS. Phase velocity mapping of constant and pulsatile flow through a metallic stent using MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:59-65.
14. Haacke EM, Brown RW, Thompson MR, Venkatesan R. Magnetic resonance imaging-physical principles and sequence design. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1999. p 375.
15. Behrens GR, Agarwal RK. Numerical simulation of steady Newtonian and non- Newtonian flow through a vascular stenosis. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics. Toronto, Canada. 2004.
16. Oshinski JN, Ku DN, Pettigrew RI. Turbulent fluctuation velocity: the most significant determinant of signal loss in stenotic vessels. Magn Reson Med 1995;33:193-199.
17. Siegel JM, Oshinski JN, Pettigrew RI, Ku DN. Comparison of phantom and computer-simulated MR images of flow in a convergent geometry: implications for improved two-dimensional MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995;5:677-683.
18. Siegel JM, Oshinski JN, Pettigrew RI, Ku DN. The accuracy of magnetic resonance phase velocity measurements in stenotic flow. J Biomech 1996;29:1665-1672.
19. Shalman E, Barak C, Dgany E, et al. Pressure-based simultaneous CFR and FFR measurements: understanding the physiology of a stented vessel. Comput Biol Med 2001;31:353-363.
20. Shibata M, Sakuma H, Isaka N, et al. Assessment of coronary flow reserve with fast cine phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with measurements by Doppler guide wire. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:563-568.
21. Sakuma H, Koskenvuo JW, Neimi P, et al. Assessment of coronary flow reserve using fast velocity-encoded cine MR imaging: validation study using positron emission tomography. Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:1029-1033.
22. Nagel E, Bornstedt A, Hug J, et al. Noninvasive determination of coronary blood flow velocity with magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of breath-hold and navigator techniques with intravascular ultrasound. Magn Reson Med 1999;41:544-549.
23. Kern MJ, Puri S, Bach RG, et al. Abnormal coronary flow velocity reserve after coronary artery stenting in patients: role of relative coronary reserve to assess potential mechanisms. Circulation 1999;100:2491-2498.
24. Bedaux WLF, Hofman MBM, Vyt SLA, et al. Assessment of coronary artery bypass graft disease using cardiovascular magnetic resonance determination of flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40: 1848-1855.
25. Parham WA, Kern MJ. Complex decision-making for percutaneous coronary intervention in a patient with coronary artery bypass grafting: use of FFR in multi-vessel lesion selection. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003;59:468-470.
26. Suwaidi JA, Higano ST, Holmes DR, Rihal CS, Lerman A. Measuring maximal percent area stenosis post stent placement with intracoronary Doppler and the continuity equation and correlation with intracoronary ultrasound and angiography. Am J Cardiol 1999;84:650-654.
27. Walpoth BH, Muller MF, Genyk I, et al. Evaluation of coronary bypass flow with color-Doppler and magnetic resonance imaging techniques: comparison with intraoperative flow measurements. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999;15:795-802.
28. Moneta GL, Edwards JM, Chitwood RW, et al. Correlation of North American symptomatic carotid endarterectomy trial (NASCET) angiographic definition of 70-99% internal carotid artery stenosis with duplex scanning. J Vasc Surg 1993;17:152-159.
29. Moneta GL, Edwards JM, Papanicolaou G, et al. Screening for asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis: duplex criteria for discriminating 60-99% stenosis. J Vasc Surg 1995;21:989-994.
30. van der Vliet JA, van Asten WN, Haenen JH, Boll AP, Buskens FG. Doppler spectrum analysis versus direct femoral artery pressure measurement for rapid assessment of aortoiliac obstruction. J Ultrasound Med 1997;16:525-528.
31. Prati F, Pawlowski T, Sommariva L, et al. Intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography assessment of late in-stent restenosis: in vivo human correlation and methodological implications. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;57:155-160.
32. Carriero A, Maggialetti A, Pinto D, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography MoBI-trak in the study of peripheral vascular disease. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2002;25:42-48.
33. Wilkstrom J, Holmberg A, Johansson L, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and duplex of the iliac arteries compared with intra-arterial pressure gradient measurements. Eur Vasc Endovasc Surg 2000;19:516-523.
34. Leiner T, Tordoir JH, Kessels AG, et al. Comparison of treatment plans for peripheral artery disease with multi-station contrast medium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and duplex ultrasound scanning. J Vasc Surg 2003:1255-1262.
35. Tan KT, van Beek EJ, Brown PW, van Delden OM, Tijssen J, Ramsay LE. Magnetic resonance angiography for diagnosis of renal artery stenosis: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 2002;57:617-624.
36. Hofmann WJ, Forstner R, Kofler B, Binder K, Urgurluoglu A, Magometschnigg H. Pedal artery imaging-a comparison of selective digital subtraction angiography, contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and duplex ultrasound. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2002:287-292.