Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

Assessment of aortoiliac and renal arteries: MR angiography with parallel acquisition versus conventional MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography RADIOLOGY Sutter, R., Nanz, D., Lutz, A. M., Plammatter, T., Seifert, B., Struwe, A., Heilmaier, C., Weishaupt, D., Marincek, B., Willmann, J. K. 2007; 245 (1): 276-284

Abstract

To prospectively compare the image quality, sensitivity, and specificity of three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography accelerated by parallel acquisition (ie, fast MR angiography) with MR angiography not accelerated by parallel acquisition (ie, conventional MR angiography) for assessment of aortoiliac and renal arteries, with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard.The study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was obtained from all patients. Forty consecutive patients (33 men, seven women; mean age, 63 years) suspected of having aortoiliac and renal arterial stenoses and thus examined with DSA underwent both fast (mean imaging time, 17 seconds) and conventional (mean imaging time, 29 seconds) MR angiography. The arterial tree was divided into segments for image analysis. Two readers independently evaluated all MR angiograms for image quality, presence of arterial stenosis, and renal arterial variants. Image quality, sensitivity, and specificity were analyzed on per-patient and per-segment bases for multiple comparisons (with Bonferroni correction) and for dependencies between segments (with patient as the primary sample unit). Interobserver agreement was evaluated by using kappa statistics.Overall, the image quality with fast MR angiography was significantly better (P=.001) than that with conventional MR angiography. At per-segment analysis, the image quality of fast MR angiograms of the distal renal artery tended to be better than that of conventional MR angiograms of these vessels. Differences in sensitivity for the detection of arterial stenosis between the two MR angiography techniques were not significant for either reader. Interobserver agreement in the detection of variant renal artery anatomy was excellent with both conventional and fast MR angiography (kappa=1.00).Fast MR angiography and conventional MR angiography do not differ significantly in terms of arterial stenosis grading or renal arterial variant detection.

View details for DOI 10.1148/radiol.2451062081

View details for Web of Science ID 000249577500032

View details for PubMedID 17717331