American Journal of Neuroradiology 23:1779-1784, November-December 2002
© 2002 American Society of Neuroradiology
BRAIN
Time-of-Flight MR Angiography of Carotid Artery Stenosis: Does a Flow Void Represent Severe Stenosis?
a Julius Center for Patient Oriented Research, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
b Department of Vascular Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
c Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
d Image Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
Address reprint requests to Dr Willem P. Th. M. Mali, Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Time-of-flight (TOF) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used to visualize the carotid arteries; however, flow void artifacts can appear. Our purpose was to determine the frequency and diagnostic meaning of flow voids by using real patient data, as part of a larger study of MRA compared with the criterion standard, digital subtraction angiography (DSA).
METHODS: In 1997–2000, 390 consecutive patients with sonographic findings suggestive of carotid artery stenosis were included in this study. All patients subsequently underwent three-dimensional (3D) TOF MRA and conventional DSA. The frequency of flow void artifacts on 3D TOF MRA images were compared with stenosis measurements on DSA images.
RESULTS: We recorded 107 flow voids (16%) during 3D TOF MRA of 662 carotid arteries. DSA images were available for comparison in 102 cases. The median percentage of stenosis in this subgroup of flow voids on MRA images was 80%, compared with measurements on DSA images according to the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) criteria. Stenoses ranged from 36% to 100% (occlusion). Three flow voids (2.9%) were in the 0–49% range; 11 (10.8%), in the 50–69% range; and 86 (84.3%), in the 70–99% range. Two flow voids (2.0%) represented occlusions. The positive predictive value of a flow void artifact for the presence of severe (70–99%) stenosis was 84.3% (95% CI: 77.3%, 91.4%).
CONCLUSION: Flow void artifacts represented severe stenosis in most of the arteries. According to our data, the assumption that flow voids on 3D TOF MRA images represent severe stenosis is justified.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  L.S. Babiarz, J.M. Romero, E.K. Murphy, B. Brobeck, P.W. Schaefer, R.G. Gonzalez, and M.H. Lev Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography Is Not More Accurate Than Unenhanced 2D Time-of-Flight MR Angiography for Determining >=70% Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., April 1, 2009; 30(4): 761 - 768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Runck, R.P. Steiner, W.A. Bautz, and M.M. Lell MR Imaging: Influence of Imaging Technique and Postprocessing on Measurement of Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., October 1, 2008; 29(9): 1736 - 1742. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. U-King-Im, M. J. Graves, J. J. Cross, N. J. Higgins, J. Wat, R. A. Trivedi, T. Tang, S. P. S. Howarth, P. J. Kirkpatrick, N. M. Antoun, et al. Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis: Accuracy of Subjective Visual Impression for Evaluation with Digital Subtraction Angiography and Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 213 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lell, C. Fellner, U. Baum, T. Hothorn, R. Steiner, W. Lang, W. Bautz, and F.A. Fellner Evaluation of Carotid Artery Stenosis with Multisection CT and MR Imaging: Influence of Imaging Modality and Postprocessing AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2007; 28(1): 104 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. K.S. U-King-Im, R. A. Trivedi, J. J. Cross, N. J.P. Higgins, W. Hollingworth, M. Graves, I. Joubert, P. J. Kirkpatrick, N. M. Antoun, and J. H. Gillard Measuring Carotid Stenosis on Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography: Diagnostic Performance and Reproducibility of 3 Different Methods Stroke, September 1, 2004; 35(9): 2083 - 2088. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. U-King-Im, R. A. Trivedi, M. J. Graves, N. J. Higgins, J. J. Cross, B. D. Tom, W. Hollingworth, H. Eales, E. A. Warburton, P. J. Kirkpatrick, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography for carotid disease: Diagnostic and potential clinical impact Neurology, April 27, 2004; 62(8): 1282 - 1290. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. H. Lev, J. M. Romero, and R. G. Gonzalez Flow voids in Time-of-Flight MR Angiography of Carotid Artery Stenosis? It Depends on the TE! AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., November 1, 2003; 24(10): 2120 - 2120. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. E. Heiserman, W. P.T.M. Mali, and P. J. Nederkoorn Flow Voids and Carotid MR Angiography AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., September 1, 2003; 24(8): 1727 - 1727. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Nederkoorn, O. E. H. Elgersma, Y. van der Graaf, B. C. Eikelboom, L. J. Kappelle, and W. P. T. M. Mali Carotid Artery Stenosis: Accuracy of Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography for Diagnosis Radiology, September 1, 2003; 228(3): 677 - 682. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|