Accuracy of computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography for diagnosing renal artery stenosis

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 141, Issue 9, 2004, Pages 674-682

  Vasbinder, G Boudewijn C ^a   Nelemans, Patricia J ^b   Kessels, Alfons G H ^b   Kroon, Abraham A ^b   Maki, Jeffrey H ^b   Leiner, Tim ^b   Beek, Frederik J A ^b   Korst, Michael B J M ^b   Flobbe, Karin ^b   De Haan, Michiel W ^b   Van Zwam, Willem H ^b   Postma, Cornelis T ^b   Hunink, M G Myriam ^b   De Leeuw, Peter W ^b   Van Engelshoven, Jos M A ^b  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FIBROMUSCULAR DYSPLASIA; HUMAN; KIDNEY ARTERY STENOSIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NETHERLANDS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL;

EID: 7244247159     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-141-9-200411020-00007     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Young N, Chi KK, Ajaka J, McKay L, O'Neill D, Wong KP. Complications with outpatient angiography and interventional procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2002;25:123-6. [PMID: 11901430]
2. Waugh JR, Sacharias N. Arteriographic complications in the DSA era. Radiology. 1992;182:243-6. [PMID: 1727290]
3. Vasbinder GB, Nelemans PJ, Kessels AG, Kroon AA, de Leeuw PW, van Engelshoven JM. Diagnostic tests for renal artery stenosis in patients suspected of having renovascular hypertension: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:401-11. [PMID: 11560453]
4. Equine O, Beregi JP, Mounier-Vehier C, Gautier C, Desmoucelles F, Carre A. [Importance of the echo-doppler and helical angioscanner of the renal arteries in the management of renovascular diseases. Results of a retrospective study in 113 patients]. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1999;92:1043-5. [PMID: 10486662]
5. Galanski M, Prokop M, Chavan A, Schaefa C, Jandeleit K, Olbricht C. [Accuracy of CT angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis]. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr. 1994;161:519-25. [PMID: 7803775]
6. Kaatee R, Beek FJ, de Lange EE, van Leeuwen MS, Smits HF, van der Ven PJ, et al. Renal artery stenosis: detection and quantification with spiral CT angiography versus optimized digital subtraction angiography. Radiology. 1997;205:121-7. [PMID: 9314973]
7. Olbricht CJ, Paul K, Prokop M, Chavan A, Schaefer-Prokop CM, Jandeleit K, et al. Minimally invasive diagnosis of renal artery stenosis by spiral computed tomography angiography. Kidney Int. 1995;48:1332-7. [PMID: 8569096]
8. Wittenberg G, Kenn W, Tschammler A, Sandstede J, Hahn D. Spiral CT angiography of renal arteries: comparison with angiography. Eur Radiol. 1999;9:546-51. [PMID: 10087131]
9. De Cobelli F, Venturini M, Vanzulli A, Sironi S, Salvioni M, Angeli E, et al. Renal arterial stenosis: prospective comparison of color Doppler US and breath-hold, three-dimensional, dynamic, gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology. 2000;214:373-80. [PMID; 10671583]
10. Leung DA, Pelkonen P, Hany TF, Zimmermann G, Ptammatter T, Debatin JF. Value of image subtraction in 3D gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the renal arteries. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;8:598-602. [PMID: 9626874]
11. Rieumont MJ, Kaufman JA, Geller SC, Yucel EK, Cambria RP, Fang LS, et al. Evaluation of renal artery stenosis with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:39-44. [PMID: 9207498]
12. Thornton J, O'Callaghan J, Walshe J, O'Brien E, Varghese JC, Lee MJ. Comparison of digital subtraction angiography with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Eur Radiol. 1999;9:930-4. [PMID: 10369993]
13. Bongers V, Bakker J, Beutler JJ, Beek FJ, De Merk JM. Assessment of renal artery stenosis: comparison of captopril renography and gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography. Clin Radiol. 2000;55:346-53. [PMID: 10816399]
14. Korst MB, Joosten FB, Postma CT, Jager GJ, Krabbe JK, Barentsz JO. Accuracy of normal-dose contrast-enhanced MR angiography in assessing renal artery stenosis and accessory renal arteries. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:629-34. [PMID: 10701600]
15. Detection, evaluation, and treatment of renovascular hypertension. Final report. Working Group on Renovascular Hypertension. Arch Intern Med. 1987;147:820-9. [PMID: 2953317]
16. Anderson GH Jr, Blakeman N, Streeten DH. Prediction of renovascular hypertension. Comparison of clinical diagnostic indices. Am J Hypertens. 1988;1:301-4. [PMID: 3390324]
17. Krijnen P, van Jaarsveld BC, Steyerberg EW, Man in 't Veld AJ, Schalekamp MA, Habbema JD. A clinical prediction rule for renal artery stenosis. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129:705-11. [PMID: 9841602]
18. Shellock FG, Kanal E. Policies, guidelines, and recommendations for MR imaging safety and patient management. SMRI Safety Committee. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1991;1:97-101. [PMID: 1802138]
19. Lufft V, Hoogestraat-Lufft L, Fels LM, Egbeyong-Baiyee D, Tusch G, Galanski M, et al. Contrast media nephropathy: intravenous CT angiography versus intraarterial digital subtraction angiography in renal artery stenosis: a prospective randomized trial. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40:236-42. [PMID: 12148095]
20. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provisions for scales disagreement of partial credit. Psychological Bulletin. 1968;70:213-20.
21. Survey Data Reference Manual. College Station, TX: Stata Pr; 2003:65-8.
22. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148:839-43. [PMID: 6878708]
23. Farres MT, Lammer J, Schima W, Wagner B, Wildling R, Winkelbauer F, et al. Spiral computed tomographic angiography of the renal arteries: a prospective comparison with intravenous and intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1996;19:101-6. [PMID: 8662167]
24. Kim TS, Chung JW, Park JH, Kim SH, Yeon KM, Han MC. Renal artery evaluation: comparison of spiral CT angiography to intra-arterial DSA. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1998;9:553-9. [PMID: 9684822]
25. Schoenberg SO, Knopp MV, Londy F, Krishnan S, Zuna I, Lang N, et al. Morphologic and functional magnetic resonance imaging of renal artery stenosis: a multireader tricenter study. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13:158-69. [PMID: 11752033]
26. Vasbinder GB, Maki JH, Nijenhuis RJ, Leiner T, Wilson GJ, Kessels AG, et al. Motion of the distal renal artery during three-dimensional contrast-enhanced breath-hold MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;16:685-96. [PMID: 12451582]
27. Safian RD, Textor SC. Renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:431-42. [PMID: 11172181]
28. Pohl MA, Novick AC. Natural history of atherosclerotic and fibrous renal artery disease: clinical implications. Am J Kidney Dis. 1985;5:A120-30. [PMID: 3887900]
29. de Vries AR, Engels PH, Overtoom TT, Saltzherr TP, Geyskes BG. Inter-observer variability in assessing renal artery stenosis by digital subtraction angiography. Diagn Imaging Clin Med. 1984;53:277-81. [PMID: 6391782]
30. Schreij G, de Haan MW, Oei TK, Koster D, de Leeuw PW. Interpretation of renal angiography by radiologists. J Hypertens. 1999;17:1737-41. [PMID: 10658940]
31. van Jaarsveld BC, Pieterman H, van Dijk LC, van Seijen AJ, Krijnen P, Derkx FH, et al. Inter-observer variability in the angiographic assessment of renal artery stenosis. DRASTIC study group. Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative. J Hypertens. 1999;17:1731-6. [PMID: 10658939]
32. Paul JF, Cherrak I, Jaulent MC, Chatellier G, Plouin PF, Degoulet P, et al. Interobserver variability in the interpretation of renal digital subtraction angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:1285-8. [PMID: 10541106]
33. Boyko EJ, Alderman BW, Baron AE. Reference test errors bias the evaluation of diagnostic tests for ischemic heart disease. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3:476-81. [PMID: 3049969]
34. Deneef P. Evaluating rapid tests for streptococcal pharyngitis: the apparent accuracy of a diagnostic test when there are errors in the standard of comparison. Med Decis Making. 1987;7:92-6. [PMID: 3553828]
35. Vacek PM. The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Biometrics. 1985;41:959-68. [PMID: 3830260]
36. Rieumont MJ, Kaufman JA, Geller SC, Yucel EK, Cambria RP, Fang LS, et al. Evaluation of renal artery stenosis with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:39-44. [PMID: 9207498]
37. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fest MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:952-62. [PMID: 10542355]
38. Klingenbeck-Regn K, Schaller S, Flohr T, Ohnesorge B, Kopp AF, Baum U. Subsecond multi-slice computed tomography: basics and applications. Eur J Radiol. 1999;31:110-24. [PMID: 10565510]