Carotid Artery Stenosis: Intraindividual Correlations of 3D Time-of-Flight MR Angiography, Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography, Conventional DSA, and Rotational Angiography for Detection and Grading

Abstract

DSA results in an underestimation of ICA stenosis compared with rotational angiography. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography correlates best with rotational angiography.

Angiography Underestimates Peripheral Atherosclerosis:Lumenography Revisited

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) allow noninvasive interrogation of the coronary vessels, and these techniques have been applied to peripheral vessels. 8,9 Importantly, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been utilized increasingly in assessment of coronary plaque volume, plaque morphology, and effects of treatment. Use of this sensitive and accurate technology has allowed demonstration of coronary plaque stabilization and inhibition of progression of atherosclerosis with potent lipid-lowering therapy.…”

MR Imaging: Influence of Imaging Technique and Postprocessing on Measurement of Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis

“…Many studies have been published comparing different imaging techniques, 10 but only a few have focused on the effect of postprocessing on stenosis measurement in carotid artery stenosis. [21][22][23] CE-MRA of the carotid arteries may be equivalent to 3D-TOF-MRA 24,25 and perhaps even DSA [26][27][28] in detecting severe ICA stenosis (Ͼ70%). Sensitivities between 88% and 97% (CE-MRA) and 82% and 92% (TOF-MRA) and specificities between 89% and 96% (CE-MRA) and 76% and 97% (TOF-MRA) have been reported for detection of severe ICA stenosis in a recent meta-analysis.…”

Multicenter, Intraindividual Comparison of Single-Dose Gadobenate Dimeglumine and Double-Dose Gadopentetate Dimeglumine for MR Angiography of the Supra-Aortic Arteries (the Supra-Aortic VALUE Study)

“…For the supra-aortic vasculature in particular, in which stenoses often develop asymmetrically, this may result in underestimation of the narrowest portion of the residual lumen and potentially result in patients not receiving appropriate treatment. 29,30 However, this was a potential limitation only for the assessment of diagnostic performance; it would not have influenced the blinded readers' subjective assessment of CE-MRA image quality. A second possible limitation is that examinations were performed at 1.5T only.…”

“…[1][2][3] Many of the included studies, however, used either a double dose of gadolinium contrast agent or a standard volume of [25][26][27][28][29][30] mL (corresponding to 0.17-0.2 mmol/kg for a 75-kg patient). Although some studies have used lower doses, this use has often been associated with compromised spatial resolution and image quality.…”