The following table or figure may be downloaded to PowerPoint for personal use in teaching and presentations. This feature is available to all subscribers to the journal.

You MUST read and follow the guidelines at Request to Reproduce AJR Content if you are distributing or using AJR content beyond academic use (limited distribution, non-revenue producing, or educational purposes).

(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds.
If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Click on image to view larger version.

Fig. 3C —71-year-old man with history of blue toes. Conventional digital subtraction angiography (A), sagittal slab 3D contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) (B), and bolus chase 3D CE-MRA (C) images of calf and foot vessels. In right leg, there is very good correlation in depiction of arterial branches between conventional angiography and sagittal slab 3D CE-MRA. There is no venous contamination in sagittal slab 3D CE-MRA, whereas bolus chase MRA shows moderate degree of venous contamination. In left leg, small vessels at level of proximal portion of peroneal artery are better seen in bolus chase MRA than in sagittal slab MRA. This is likely secondary to differential flow between both legs. Because acquisition time for sagittal slab MRA is very rapid and timing delay is calculated for early enhancing vessels, there is some risk that sagittal slab acquisition will be too early to depict small vessels with slow flow when compared with bolus chase MRA.