A comparison of magnetic resonance angiography, contrast arteriography, and duplex arteriography for patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization

Annals of Vascular Surgery

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 294-301

  Hingorani, Anil ^a,b   Ascher, Enrico ^a,b   Markevich, Natalia ^a,b   Kallakuri, Sreedhar ^a,b   Schutzer, Richard ^a,b   Yorkovich, William ^a,b   Jacob, Theresa ^a,b  

^a Maimonides Medical Center ^*

^b MAIMONIDES MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTERIOGRAPHY; ARTERY CALCIFICATION; ARTICLE; CLAUDICATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ARTERIOGRAPHY; DISEASE SEVERITY; DUPLEX ARTERIOGRAPHY; GANGRENE; HUMAN; IMAGING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LEG ISCHEMIA; LEG PAIN; LEG REVASCULARIZATION; LEG ULCER; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TIBIAL ARTERY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EID: 2542433195     PISSN: 08905096     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10016-004-0039-0     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Velazquez OC, Baum RA, Carpenter JP. Magnetic resonance angiography of lower-extremity arterial disease. Surg. Clin. North Am. 1998;78:519-537.
2. Cambria RP, Kaufman JA, L'Italien GJ, et al. Magnetic resonance angiography in the management of lower extremity arterial occlusive disease: a prospective study. J. Vasc. Surg. 1997;25:380-389.
3. Snidow JJ, Harris VJ, Trerotola SO, et al. Interpretations and treatment decisions based on MR angiography versus conventional Parteriography in symptomatic lower extremity ischemia. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 1995;6:595-603.
4. Sueyoshi E, Sakamoto I, Matsuoka Y, et al. Aortoiliac and lower extremity arteries: comparison of three-dimensional dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR angiography and conventional angiography. Radiology 1999;210:683-688.
5. Baum RA, Rutter CM, Sunshine JH. Multicenter trial to evaluate vascular magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremity. J.A.M.A. 1995;274:875-880.
6. Lundin P, Svensson A, Henriksen E, et al. Imaging of aortoiliac arterial disease. Duplex ultrasound and MR angiography versus digital subtraction angiography. Acta. Radiol. 2000;41:125-132.
7. Cossman DV, Ellison JE, Wagner WH, et al. Comparison of contrast arteriography to arterial mapping with color-flow duplex imaging in the lower extremities. J. Vasc. Surg. 1989;10:522-528.
8. Larch E, Minar E, Ahmadi R, et al. Value of color duplex sonography for evaluation of tibioperoneal arteries in patients with femoropopliteal obstruction: a prospective comparison with anterograde intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. J. Vasc. Surg. 1997;25:629-66.
9. Lai DT, Huber D, Glasson R, et al. Colour duplex ultrasonography versus angiography in the diagnosis of lower-extremity arterial disease. Cardiovasc. Surg. 1996;4:384-338.
10. Wain RA, Berdejo GL, Delvalle WN, et al. Can duplex scan arterial mapping replace contrast arteriography as the test of choice before infrainguinal revascularization?. J. Vasc. Surg. 1999;29:100-107.
11. Sensier Y, Hartshorne T, Thrush A, Nydahl S, Bolia A, London NJ. A prospective comparison of lower limb colour-coded Duplex scanning with arteriography. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1996;11:170-175.
12. Ligush J, Jr, Reavis SW, Preisser JS, Hansen KJ. Duplex ultrasound scanning defines operative strategies for patients with limb-threatening ischemia. J. Vasc. Surg. 1998;28:482-490.
13. Sensier Y, Fishwick G, Owen R, Pemberton M, Bell PR, London NJ. A comparison between colour duplex ultrasonography and arteriography for imaging infrapopliteal arterial lesions. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1998;15:44-50.
14. London NJ, Sensier Y, Hartshorne T. Can lower limbultrasonography replace arteriography. Vasc. Med. 1996;1:115-119.
15. Polak JF, Karmel MI, Mannick JA, O'Leary DH, Donaldson MC, Whittemore AD. Determination of the extent of lower-extremity peripheral arterial disease with color-assisted duplex sonography: comparison with angiography. AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1990;155:1085-1089.
16. Moneta GL, Yeager RA, Antonovic R, et al. Accuracy of lower extremity arterial duplex mapping. J. Vasc. Surg. 1992;15:275-283.
17. Wilson YG, George JK, Wilkins DC, Ashley S. Duplex assessment of run-off before femorocrural reconstruction. Br. J. Surg. 1997;84:1360-1363.
18. Karacagil S, Lofberg AM, Granbo A, Lorelius LE, Bergqvist D. Value of duplex scanning in evaluation of crural and foot arteries in limbs with severe lower limb ischaemia-a prospective comparison with angiography. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1996;12:300-303.
19. Koelemay MJ, Legemate DA, Vos H de, Gurp JA van, Reekers JA, Jacobs MJ. Can cruropedal colour duplex scanning and pulse generated run-off replace angiography in candidates for distal bypass surgery. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1998;16:13-18.
20. Mazzariol F, Ascher E, Salles-Cunha SX, Gade P, Hingorani A. Values and limitations of duplex ultrasonography as the sole imaging method of preoperative evaluation for popliteal and infrapopliteal bypasses. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 1999;13:1-10.
21. Ascher E, Mazzariol F, Hingorani A, Salles-Cunha S, Gade P. The use of duplex ultrasound arterial mapping as an alternative to conventional arteriography for primary and secondary infrapopliteal bypasses. Am. J. Surg. 1999;178:162-165.
22. Mazzariol F, Ascher E, Hingorani A, Gunduz Y, Yorkovich W, Salles-Cunha S. Lower-extremity revascularisation without preoperative contrast arteriography in 185 cases: lessons learned with duplex ultrasound arterial mapping. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2000;19:509-515.
23. Kremkau FW. Diagnostic Ultrasound: Principles and Instruments 6th edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2002, pp 218-219.
24. Loftus IM, McCarthy MJ, Pau H, et al. Carotid endarterectomy without angiography does not compromise operative outcome. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1998;16:489-493.
25. Ascher E, Hingorani A. Changing characteristics of carotid endarterectomy. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 2001;15:275-280.
26. Syrek JR, Calligaro KD, Dougherty MJ, et al. Five-step protocol for carotid endarterectomy in the managed health care era. Surgery 1999;125:96-101.
27. Modaresi KB, Cox TC, Summers PE, et al. Comparison of intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography, magnetic resonance angiography and duplex ultrasonography for measuring carotid artery stenosis. Br. J. Surg. 1999;86:1422-1426.
28. Jackson MR, Chang AS, Robles HA, et al. Determination of 60% or greater carotid stenosis: a prospective comparison of magnetic resonance angiography and duplex ultrasound with conventional angiography. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 1998;12:236-243.
29. Patel MR, Kuntz KM, Klufas RA, et al. Preoperative assessment of the carotid bifurcation. Can magnetic resonance angiography and duplex ultrasonography replace contrast arteriography? Stroke 1995;26:1753-1758.
30. Wilson YG, George JK, Wilkins DC, Ashley S. Duplex assessment of run-off before femorocrural reconstruction. Br. J. Surg. 1997;84:1360-1363.
31. Verbin C, Scoccianti M, Kopchok G, Donayre C, White RA. Comparison of the utility of CT scans and intravascular ultrasound in endovascular aortic grafting. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 1995;9:434-440.
32. Vogt KC, Brunkwall J, Malina M, et al. The use of intravascular ultrasound as control procedure for the deployment of endovascular stented grafts. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1997;13:592-596.
33. White RA, Verbin C, Kopchok G, Scoccianti M, Virgilio C de , Donayre C. The role of cinefluoroscopy and intravascular ultrasonography in evaluating the deployment of experimental endovascular prostheses. J. Vasc. Surg. 1995;21:365-374.
34. Beebe HG, Jackson T, Pigott JP. Aortic aneurysm morphology for planning endovascular aortic grafts: limitations of conventional imaging methods. J. Endovasc. Surg. 1995;2:139-148.
35. Beebe HG, Kritpracha B. Screening and preoperative imaging of candidates for conventional repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Semin. Vasc. Surg. 1999;12:300-305.
36. Huber R, Back M, Ballinger R, et al. Utility of magnetic resonance arteriography for distal lower extremity revascularization. J. Vasc. Surg. 1997;26:415-423.