Comparison of gadodiamide-enhanced MR angiography to intraarterial digital subtraction angiography for evaluation of renal artery stenosis: Results of a phase III multicenter trial

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 390-397

  Garovic, Vesna D ^a   Achauer, Manuela A ^b   Kittner, Thomas ^c   Horák, David ^d   Sheng, Rubin ^e   Stanson, Anthony W ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b Vascular and Interventional Radiology Clinic   (Austria)

^c Hospital Dresden Friedrichstadt   (Germany)

^d PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^e GE HEALTHCARE   (United States)

Author keywords

Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography; Gadodiamide administration; Multicenter, controlled study; Renal artery stenosis

Indexed keywords

GADODIAMIDE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIARRHEA; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FEMALE; HOT FLUSH; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KIDNEY ARTERY STENOSIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKIN PRURITUS;

ANGIOGRAPHY, DIGITAL SUBTRACTION; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; INTERNATIONALITY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; RENAL ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 75749126180     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22032     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Harding MB, Smith LR, Himmelstein SI. Renal artery stenosis: prevalence and associated risk factors in patients undergoing routine cardiac catheterization. J Am Soc Nephrol 1992;2:1608-1616.
2. United States Renal Data System (USRDS) 1997 Annual Data Report. Bethesda, MD, US Department of Health and Human Services/National Institute of Health/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 1997.
3. Dorros G, Jaff M, Mathiak L, et al. Four-year follow-up of Palmaz-Schatz stent revascularization as treatment for atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. Circulation 1998;98:642-647.
4. Watson PS, Hadjipetrou P, Cox SV, et al. effect of renal artery stenting on renal function and size in patients with atherosclerotic renovascular disease. Circulation 2000;102:1671-1677.
5. van Jaarsveld BC, Krijnen P, Pieterman H, et al. The effect of balloon angioplasty on hypertension in artherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1007-1014.
6. Mallouhi A, Schocke M, Judmaier W, et al. 3D MR angiography of renal arteries: comparison of volume rendering and maximum intensity projection algorithms. Radiology 2002;223:509-516.
7. Masunaga H, Takehara Y, Isoda H, et al. Assessment of gadodiamide-enhanced time-resolved three dimensional MR angiography for evaluating renal artery stenosis. Am J Roentgenol 2001;176: 1213-1219.
8. Waugh JR, Sacharias N. Arteriographic complications in the DSA era. Radiology 1992;182:243-246.
9. Konkus CJ, Czum JM, Jacobacci JT. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the aorta and lower extremities with routine inclusion of the feet. Am J Radiol 2002;179:115-117.
10. Swan JS, Carroll TJ, Kennell TW, et al. Time-resolved three-dimensional contrast enhanced MR angiography of the peripheral vessels. Radiology 2002;225:43-52.
11. Leung DA, Hagspiel KD, Angle JF, Spinosa DJ, Matsumoto AH, Butty S. MR angiography of the renal arteries. Radiol Clin N Am 2002;40:847-865.
12. Prince MR, Grist TM, Debatin JF (eds.). Renal arteries. In:3D contrast MR angiography, 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1999:89-105.
13. Dellegrottaglie S, Sanz J, Rajagopalan S. Technology insight: clinical role of magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis and management of renal artery stenosis. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med 2006;3:329-338.
14. Schoenberg SO, Rieger J, Weber CH, et al. High-spatial-resolution MR angiography of renal arteries with integrated parallel acquisitions: comparison with digital subtraction angiography and US. Radiology 2005;235:687-698.
15. Prince MR, Yucel EK, Kaufman JA, et al. Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional abdominal MR arteriography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993;3:877-881.
16. Vasbinder GB, Nelemans PJ, Kessels AG, et al. Accuracy of computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography for diagnosing renal arter stenosis. Ann Intern Med 2004; 149:674-682.
17. Grobner T. Gadolinium - a specific trigger for the development of nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006;21:1104-1108.
18. Prince MR, Zhang HL, Morris M, et al. Incidence of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis at two large medical centers. Radiology 2008;248:807-816.
19. Rajagopalan S, Prince M. Magnetic resonance angiographic techniques for the diagnosis of arterial disease. Cardiol Clin 2002;20:501-502.
20. Prince MR. Renal MR angiography: a comprehensive approach. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998;8:511-516.
21. Sharafuddin MJ, Stolpen AH, Dixon BS, et al. Value of MR angiography before percutaneous transluminal renal artery angioplasty and stent placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2002; 13(9 Pt 1):901-908.
22. Omniscan [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: GE Healthcare; 2007.
23. Vosshenrich R, Kopka L, Castillo E, et al. Electrocardiograph-triggered two-dimensional time-of-flight versus optimized contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography of the peripheral arteries. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16:887-892.
24. Poon E, Yucel EK, Pagan-Marin H, et al. Iliac artery stenosis measurements: comparison of two-dimensional time-of-flight and three-dimensional dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1139-1144.
25. Dong Q, Schoenberg SO, Carlos RC et al. Diagnosis of renal vascular disease with MR angiography. Radiographics 1999;19:1535-1554.
26. Weinreb JC. Impact on hospital policy: Yale experience. J Am Coll Radiol 2008;5:53-56.