American Journal of Neuroradiology, Vol 17, Issue 9 1749-1757, Copyright © 1996 by American Society of Neuroradiology
ARTICLES |
Intracranial stenoocclusive disease: MR angiography with magnetization transfer and variable flip angle
G Furst, M Hofer, H Steinmetz, J Kambergs, C Paselk, D Liebsch, A Aulich and U Modder
Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, Heinrich-Heine-University, Dusseldorf, Germany.
PURPOSE: To assess time-of-flight MR angiography that uses magnetization transfer contrast (MTC) pulses, tilted optimized nonsaturating excitation (TONE), and a 256 x 512 image matrix for the detection of small intracranial arteries and for the detection and quantification of intracranial arterial stenoocclusive disease. METHODS: To assess anatomic sensitivity, six interpreters, in a blinded fashion, reviewed the MTC/TONE MR angiograms and selective intraarterial angiograms obtained in 70 patients within a mean interval of 5.5 days (SD, 1.5). In addition, all intracranial angiograms were evaluated with regard to presence and degree of arterial stenosis and anatomic variants. RESULTS: Interobserver correlations for determining vessel length were comparably high for both methods. A strong correlation was found between measurements obtained on MR angiograms and those obtained on intraarterial angiograms. The mean vascular length averaged across all arteries was 34.8 mm (SD, 28.1) on MR angiograms and 53.2 mm (SD, 36.8) on intraarterial angiograms. Forty- one stenoses and occlusions and 30 anatomic variants were identified with intraarterial angiography. All arterial variants and 100% of occluded vessels were graded correctly. Moreover, 80% of stenoses greater than 70% and 88% of stenoses less than 70% were quantified correctly at MR angiography. Specificity for identifying stenotic disease was 99%. CONCLUSION: Despite inferior display of vessel length, MTC/TONE MR angiography with increased spatial resolution was able to show the vast majority of high grade lesions visible at selective intraarterial angiography and may suffice for clinical decision making in many patients.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  C.G. Choi, D.H. Lee, J.H. Lee, H.W. Pyun, D.W. Kang, S.U. Kwon, J.K. Kim, S.J. Kim, and D.C. Suh Detection of Intracranial Atherosclerotic Steno-Occlusive Disease with 3D Time-of-Flight Magnetic Resonance Angiography with Sensitivity Encoding at 3T AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., March 1, 2007; 28(3): 439 - 446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.I. Aviv, S.M. Benseler, G. DeVeber, E.D. Silverman, P.N. Tyrrell, L.M. Tsang, and D. Armstrong Angiography of Primary Central Nervous System Angiitis of Childhood: Conventional Angiography versus Magnetic Resonance Angiography at Presentation AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2007; 28(1): 9 - 15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.I. Aviv, S.M. Benseler, E.D. Silverman, P.N. Tyrrell, G. DeVeber, L.M. Tsang, and D. Armstrong MR Imaging and Angiography of Primary CNS Vasculitis of Childhood AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2006; 27(1): 192 - 199. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Hirai, Y. Korogi, K. Ono, M. Nagano, K. Maruoka, S. Uemura, and M. Takahashi Prospective Evaluation of Suspected Stenoocclusive Disease of the Intracranial Artery: Combined MR Angiography and CT Angiography Compared with Digital Subtraction Angiography AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2002; 23(1): 93 - 101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. F. Arenillas, C. A. Molina, J. Montaner, S. Abilleira, M. A. Gonzalez-Sanchez;, and J. Alvarez-Sabin Progression and Clinical Recurrence of Symptomatic Middle Cerebral Artery Stenosis: A Long-Term Follow-Up Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound Study Stroke, December 1, 2001; 32(12): 2898 - 2904. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. J. Graham and R. M. Henkelman Pulsed Magnetization Transfer Imaging: Evaluation of Technique Radiology, September 1, 1999; 212(3): 903 - 910. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skutta, Fürst, Eilers, Ferbert, and Kuhn Intracranial Stenoocclusive Disease: Double-Detector Helical CT Angiography versus Digital Subtraction AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., May 1, 1999; 20(5): 791 - 799. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|