4.7 Article

Highly accelerated compressed sensing time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography may be reliable for diagnosing head and neck arterial steno-occlusive disease: a comparative study with digital subtraction angiography

期刊

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 30, 期 6, 页码 3059-3065

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-06682-3

关键词

Magnetic resonance angiography; Digital subtraction angiography; Stenosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction We aimed to investigate the utility of compressed sensing time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (CS TOF-MRA) for diagnosing intracranial and cervical arterial stenosis by using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. Methods Thirty-seven patients with head and neck arterial stenoses who underwent CS TOF-MRA and DSA were retrospectively enrolled. The reconstructed resolution of CS TOF-MRA was 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 mm(3). The scan time was 5 min and 2 s. The image quality of CS TOF-MRA was independently ranked by two neuroradiologists in 1031 arterial segments. The luminal stenosis grades on CS TOF-MRA and DSA were analyzed in 61 arterial segments and were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The ability of CS TOF-MRA to predict moderate to severe stenosis or occlusion was analyzed. Results The image quality of most arterial segments (95.2%) on CS TOF-MRA was excellent. Arterial segments with low image quality were mainly the V3-4 segments of the vertebral artery. The majority of arterial stenoses (62.3%) were located in the cervical internal carotid artery. The luminal stenosis grades of CS TOF-MRA were concordant with that of DSA in 50 of 61 segments (p = 0.366). CS TOF-MRA had a sensitivity of 84.4% and a specificity of 88.5% for predicting moderate to severe stenosis. For detecting occlusion lesions, it had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 94.1%. Conclusion CS TOF-MRA provides adequate image quality within a reasonable acquisition time and is a reliable tool for diagnosing head and neck arterial steno-occlusive disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据