3.0 Tesla contrast-enhanced MR angiography of carotid artery stents: In vitro measurements as compared with 1.5 Tesla

Journal of Neuroradiology

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 75-80

  Hahnel S ^a   Nguyen Trong, T H ^a   Rohde, S ^a   Hartmann, M ^a   Braun, C ^a   Sartor, K ^a   Heiland, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Artifacts; Carotid Artery; Magnetic Resonance Angiography; Stenting

Indexed keywords

COBALT; NITINOL; STAINLESS STEEL;

ARTICLE; CAROTID ARTERY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MATERIALS; MEASUREMENT; STENT;

EID: 33646729046     PISSN: 01509861     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0150-9861(06)77234-0     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. WHOLEY MH, AL-MUBAREK N. Updated review of the global carotid artery stent registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 60: 259-266.
2. LENHART M, VOLK M, MANKE C, et al. Stent appearance at contrast-enhanced MR angiography: in vitro examination with 14 stents. Radiology 2000; 217: 173-178.
3. ANDERSON CM, SALONER D, TSURUDA JS, SHAPEERO LG, LEE RE. Artifacts in maximum-intensity-projection display of MR angiograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 154: 623-629.
4. SCHENCK JF. The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys 1996; 23: 815-850.
5. BAKKER CJ, BHAGWANDIEN R, MOERLAND MA, RAMOS LM. Simulation of susceptibility artifacts in 2D and 3D Fourier transform spin-echo and gradient-echo magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12: 767-774.
6. CAMACHO CR, PLEWES DB, HENKELMAN RM. Nonsusceptibility artifacts due to metallic objects in MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 5: 75-88.
7. MEYER JM, BUECKER A, SPUENTRUP E, et al. Improved instent magnetic resonance angiography with high flip angle excitation. Invest Radiol 2001; 36: 677-681.
8. BARTELS LW, SMITS HF, BAKKER CJ, VIERGEVER MA. MR imaging of vascular stents: effects of susceptibility, flow, and radiofrequency eddy currents. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001; 12: 365-371.
9. STRAUBE T, WOLF S, FLESSER A, et al. MRI of carotid stents: influence of stent properties and sequence parameters on visualization of the carotid artery lumen. Rofo 2005; 177: 375-380.
10. NEHRA A, MORAN CJ, CROSS DT, 3rd, Derdeyn CP. MR safety and imaging of neuroform stents at 3T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004; 25: 1476-1478.
11. SHELLOCK FG. Reference Manual for Magnetic Resonance Safety, Implants, and Devices: 2005 Edition. Los Angeles, CA, USA: Biomedical Research Publishing Group, 2005.
12. JOST C, KUMAR VV. Are Current Cardiovascular Stents MRI Safe? J Invasive Cardiol 1998; 10: 477-479.
13. PRINCE MR. Gadolinium-enhanced MR aortography. Radiology 1994; 191: 155-164.
14. FRITZ-HANSEN T, ROSTRUP E, LARSSON HB, SONDERGAARD L, RING P, HENRIKSEN O. Measurement of the arterial concentration of Gd-DTPA using MRI: a step toward quantitative perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 1996; 36: 225-231.