American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 169, 45-53, Copyright © 1997 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

MR angiography of the iliac and upper femoral arteries using four different inflow techniques

KY Ho, MW de Haan, TK Oei, D Koster, AG Kessels, BK Janevski, P Kitslaar and JM van Engelshoven
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Maastricht, Rijksuniversiteit Limburg, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare two inflow MR angiography pulse sequences obtained with and without systolic synchronization. We also compared these two MR angiography pulse sequences with conventional angiography. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty- one consecutive patients who were scheduled for conventional angiography because of symptomatic atherosclerotic occlusive disease of the iliac or femoral artery underwent MR angiography using four different MR angiography techniques. These techniques consisted of a multiple two-dimensional inversion prepulse gradient-recalled echo technique (turbo field-echo) obtained with and without systolic synchronization and a multiple two-dimensional gradient-recalled echo technique (fast field-echo) obtained with and without systolic synchronization. We then compared image quality and our ability to detect and grade degree and length of stenosis, using conventional angiography as the gold standard. RESULTS: The systolic-synchronized turbo field-echo sequence produced the best results both objectively and subjectively. Comparing systolic-synchronized turbo field-echo and fast field-echo techniques with conventional angiography regarding detection and grading degree of stenoses, we found no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: Systolic synchronization proved to be of significant importance for image quality. The systolic- synchronized turbo field-echo pulse sequence proved to be superior to the other three MR angiography techniques.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Tatli, M. J. Lipton, B. D. Davison, R. B. Skorstad, and E. K. Yucel From the RSNA Refresher Courses: MR Imaging of Aortic and Peripheral Vascular Disease RadioGraphics, October 1, 2003; 23(90001): S59 - 78. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Loewe, M. Schoder, T. Rand, U. Hoffmann, J. Sailer, T. Kos, J. Lammer, and S. Thurnher Peripheral Vascular Occlusive Disease: Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Moving-Bed MR Angiography Versus Digital Subtraction Angiography in 106 Patients Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2002; 179(4): 1013 - 1021. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. W. Koelemay, J. G. Lijmer, J. Stoker, D. A. Legemate, and P. M. M. Bossuyt Magnetic Resonance Angiography for the Evaluation of Lower Extremity Arterial Disease: A Meta-analysis JAMA, March 14, 2001; 285(10): 1338 - 1345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Huber, A. Heuck, A. Baur, T. Helmberger, T. Waggershauser, A. Billing, M. Heiss, R. Petsch, and M. Reiser Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography from the Distal Aorta to the Ankle Joint with a Step-by-Step Technique Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2000; 175(5): 1291 - 1298. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Nelemans, T. Leiner, H. C. W. de Vet, and J. M. A. van Engelshoven Peripheral Arterial Disease: Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Performance of MR Angiography Radiology, October 1, 2000; 217(1): 105 - 114. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				N. M. Rofsky and M. A. Adelman MR Angiography in the Evaluation of Atherosclerotic Peripheral Vascular Disease Radiology, February 1, 2000; 214(2): 325 - 338. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. F. M. Meaney, J. P. Ridgway, S. Chakraverty, I. Robertson, D. Kessel, A. Radjenovic, M. Kouwenhoven, A. Kassner, and M. A. Smith Stepping-Table Gadolinium- enhanced Digital Subtraction MR Angiography of the Aorta and Lower Extremity Arteries: Preliminary Experience Radiology, April 1, 1999; 211(1): 59 - 67. [Abstract] [Full Text]