2008
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-008-0413-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

No advantage of time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography at 3 Tesla compared to 1.5 Tesla in the follow-up after endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(29 reference statements)
1
12
1
Order By: Relevance
“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]24 In summary, some of these studies showed results similar to those in our current study, and some showed the superior performance of MRA relative to DSA compared with that in our current study, though some of these differences are very likely related to the differences in the aneurysm occlusion scales used. Conflicting conclusions regarding the performance of MRA relative to DSA and of the performance of various MRA techniques relative to each other certainly still exist, however.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]24 In summary, some of these studies showed results similar to those in our current study, and some showed the superior performance of MRA relative to DSA compared with that in our current study, though some of these differences are very likely related to the differences in the aneurysm occlusion scales used. Conflicting conclusions regarding the performance of MRA relative to DSA and of the performance of various MRA techniques relative to each other certainly still exist, however.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…There remains ambiguity over the overall performance of MRA relative to DSA in the depiction of coiled aneurysm remnants and in the relative performance of TOF-MRA, bolus gadolinium CE-MRA, and MRA performed at the field strengths of 1.5 T versus at 3T, with different groups reporting conflicting results. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] We wished to prospectively study the performance of MRA relative to DSA for the clinical indication of the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms, and more specifically, we wished to study the relative performance of the 2 major types of MRA at 2 popular main magnetic field strengths, 1.5 and 3T. We present the results of a prospective clinical trial comparing the accuracies of 4 different MRA techniques, TOF and CE-MRA both at 1.5T and at 3T, by using DSA as the standard of reference in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[7][8][9][10] Direct comparison of MRA performed at 3T and 1.5T is relatively scarce, has been conducted in small series of patients, and is associated with contradictory results. [11][12][13] To compare the value of 3D-TOF at 1.5T and 3T, a prospective consecutive monocentric study was conducted in patients having follow-up examinations including DSA for coiled intracranial aneurysms. In this group of patients, 3D TOF-MRA was performed at both 3T and 1.5T.…”
Section: Abbreviationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No advantage has been demonstrated for TOF-MRA at 3 T over 1.5 T, regarding the diagnostic value of depicting aneurysm recurrence [42].…”
Section: Follow-up Strategy and Imaging Techniques In Follow-upmentioning
confidence: 99%