AJR InPractice
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, O.
Right arrow Articles by L'Herminé, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, O.
Right arrow Articles by L'Herminé, C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2000; 174:433-439
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Comparing Contrast-Enhanced Breath-Hold MR Angiography and Conventional Angiography

Olivier Ernst1,2, Vincent Asnar3, Géraldine Sergent1, Emmanuel Lederman3, Lionel Nicol4, Jean-Claude Paris3 and Claude L'Herminé1

1 Department of Radiology, Hôpital Huriez, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, 1 rue Polonovski, F-59037 Lille, France.
2 Department of Radiology, Hôpital Calmette, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Blvd. du Professeur Leclerc, F-59037 Lille, France.
3 Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Huriez, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, F-59037 Lille, France.
4 Siemens SAS, 39 Blvd. Ornano, F-93527 Saint-Denis, France.

Received January 13, 1999; accepted after revision July 8, 1999.

 
Address correspondence to O. Ernst.


Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
OBJECTIVE. Our aim was to compare the results of gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MRangiographywiththoseofconventionalangiographyforthestudyofmesentericcirculation.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography were prospectively performed in 33 patients referred for hepatic, pancreatic, or mesenteric disease. MR angiography was performed with four three-dimensional acquisitions at 0, 30, 60, and 90 sec after injection of 0.1 mmol/kg of gadolinium. Selective conventional angiography was used as the standard of reference.

RESULTS. A pure arterial angiogram (one on which veins could not be visualized) was obtainedin 27 patients during the second or third acquisition. By subtracting the arterial phase from an arteriovenous phase (third or fourth acquisition) we obtained a pure venous angiogram (one on which arteries could not be visualized) in 28 patients. Agreement was good or excellent for the hepatic artery ({kappa} = 0.78), the superior mesenteric artery ({kappa} = 0.65), the splenic artery ({kappa} = 0.70), the portal vein ({kappa} = 1.0), the superior mesenteric vein ({kappa} = 0.88), and the splenic vein ({kappa} = 0.75). Agreement was poor, and vessels were better shown by conventional angiography, for the intrahepatic arteries ({kappa} = 0.006) and the branches of the superior mesenteric artery ({kappa} = 0.14). MR angiography and conventional angiography revealed 29 and 27 portosystemic collaterals, respectively.

CONCLUSION. Dynamic breath-hold contrast-enhanced MR angiography compared favorably with conventional angiography in preoperative assessment of the proximal mesenteric arteries and in the evaluation of portal hypertension; however, conventional angiography is still necessary to evaluate distal arteries.


Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
In the past, MR angiography was seldom used for the evaluation of the mesenteric vasculature. The first techniques of MR angiography, time-of-flight and phase contrast, required an acquisition time up to several minutes [1, 2]. This long acquisition time makes the acquisition of MR angiography impossible during a single breath-hold; therefore, MR angiography of the upper abdomen was limited by blurring from extensive motion artifacts [3]. Furthermore, it was impossible to obtain a pure arterial phase (phase in which veins could not be visualized) andapurevenousphase(phaseinwhicharteriescouldnotbevisualized).

Gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography can now be achieved by using fast imaging techniques [4,5]. Breath-hold MR angiography limits motion artifacts [3] and has proven reliable for evaluation of the renal arteries [6,7,8]. With fast MR angiography it is possible to obtain angiograms during the arterial and venous phases of the contrast medium injection by using several acquisitions repeated at short intervals [9]. Gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography has recently been used to evaluate the mesenteric circulation [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16], but to our knowledge only a few studies have compared its results with those of conventional angiography [11,14].

The purpose of our study was to compare the results of gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiographywiththoseofconventionalangiographyintheevaluationofthemesentericcirculation.


Subjects and Methods Patients
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
Between January and July 1998, 38 consecutive patients, referred by the department of hepatogastroenterology for conventional angiography of the mesenteric circulation, were requested to undergo MR angiography according to a protocol approved by our institutional review board. Five patients were excluded from this study either because of a contraindication to MR imaging or a patient's refusal. Twenty-four men and nine women, 28-65 years old (mean, 51 years), were enrolled in our study and underwent conventional angiography and MR angiography. Angiographic examinations were performed either before liver transplantation for cirrhosis (n = 14); or before treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 10), pancreatitis (n = 6), pancreatic tumor (n = 1), mesenteric ischemia (n = 1), or periarteritis nodosa (n = 1). The delay between both examinations was 1-60 days (mean, 18 days).


MR Angiography
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
All examinations were performed with a 1.5-T system (Magnetom Vision; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) with a 300-µsec rise time, 25 mT/m maximum gradient strength, and a body phased array coil. We used a three-dimensional fast low-angle shot sequence with the following imaging parameters: TR/TE, 3.2/1.1 msec; flip angle, 30-35°; section thickness, 2.3 mm; matrix, 256 x 160; field of view, 35 cm; excitation, 0.5; and acquisition time, 13 sec. The coronal plane was used with a 120-mm slab thickness. An IV bolus of 0.1 mmol/kg of gadopentetate dimeglumine (Magnevist; Schering, Lys lez Lannoy, France) was injected at 0.01 ml·kg-1·sec-1 through an MR power injector (Spectris; MedRad, Pittsburgh, PA). Gadolinium injection was immediately followed with a 20-ml saline flush at 2 ml/sec. Data acquisition was initiated at the start of injection. Four acquisitions were successively obtained at the start of injection and 30, 60, and 90 sec afterward.

An image set was prepared for analysis. All post-processing was performed by the same radiologist, without knowledge of the conventional angiography results. Subvolume maximum-intensity-projection images were obtained in the coronal and the sagittal planes to assess the celiac trunk; the hepatic, superior mesenteric, and splenic arteries; the superior mesenteric, splenic, and portal veins; and the portosystemic collateral vessels. The arterial phase (second or third acquisition) was systematically subtracted from a delayed phase (third or fourth acquisition).


Conventional Angiography
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
Digital subtraction angiography was performed in all patients with an Advantx AFM 40 (General Electric Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI), a 1024 x 1024 matrix, and a field of view of 30 or 40 cm as appropriate. Selective studies were made using a 4- or 5-French catheter and selective injection of 35 ml of iohexol (Omnipaque 300; Nycomed, Paris, France) in the hepatic artery and the splenic artery and 60 ml in the superior mesenteric artery, with a 6 ml/sec injection rate. All views were obtained in the frontal plane. The left gastric artery and the inferior mesenteric artery were catheterized only when necessary.


Image Analysis
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
The quality of all conventional angiograms and MR angiograms was graded at a 1-month interval by two radiologists on a 1-4 scale (1 = no information, 2 = bad, 3 = good, 4 = excellent). Separate analyses were performed for the common and the proper hepatic arteries, the intrahepatic arteries, the splenic artery, the superior mesenteric artery and its branches, the gastroduodenal artery, the superior mesenteric vein, the splenic vein, and the portal vein. For the maximum intensity projections obtained from the arterial phase, the reviewers scored the projection of the vein on the arteries on a 1-4 scale (1 = nondiagnostic images because of venous projections, 2 = many venous projections, 3 = a few venous projections, 4 = no vein visible). The projection of the arteries on the veins was scored with the same scale on the maximum intensity projections obtained from the delayed phases (portal phases) and from the subtraction of the arterial phase from a portal phase. A subjective diagnostic classification was made for all the vessels: diagnostic value, none; diagnostic value, normal; diagnostic value, abnormal. The reviewers also noted aberrant hepatic artery anatomy. These variations were considered to be hepatic abnormalities. The number of collateral branches arising from the superior mesenteric artery and the presence of portosystemic collaterals such as gastroesophageal varices, umbilical vein, splenorenal anastomoses, or other hepatofugal venous pathways were evaluated on MR and conventional angiography. When discrepancies occurred between the two primary observers, these images were reviewed with a third observer and a consensus was reached.


Statistical Analysis
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
Agreement between MR angiography and conventional angiography, as well as interobserver agreement, was assessed by weighted kappa analysis. Kappa index values greater than 0.80 were considered excellent agreement; between 0.60 and 0.80, good; between 0.41 and 0.60, moderate; and less than 0.40, fair to poor [17]. A nonparametric Wilcoxon's rank sum test was used when appropriate.


Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
In one patient, catheterization of the celiac trunk was not possible during conventional angiography. In another patient, on MR angiography the arteries were faintly visible because the arterial phase occurred between the second and the third acquisitions. In the other patients, an arterial phase was always obtained, corresponding either to the second phase (n = 28) or the third phase (n = 4). A portal phase was obtained for all patients.

On conventional angiography, the average image quality for each vessel was good or excellent. On MR angiography, the average image quality was also good or excellent except for intrahepatic arteries and collaterals of the superior mesenteric artery (Table 1). The agreement between the two observers was moderate ({kappa} = 0.57). During the arterial phase, the venous system was visible in six patients (18%) but it hindered visualization of the arteries in only one. In five patients the presence of veins did not worsen the image quality, and the arteries were clearly depicted. Arteries were visualized on the portal phase in 31 patients (94%). After subtraction of the arterial phase from the portal phase, arteries were no longer visible in 28 patients (85%). The number of mesenteric branches depicted on MR angiography (mean, 5.07; SD, 1.95) and conventional angiography (mean, 9.37; SD, 2.3) was significantly different (p = 0.001).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 1 Subjective Image Quality of Breath-Hold MR Angiography and Conventional Angiography

 

The overall agreement between MR angiography and conventional angiography for depicting vascular normality or abnormality was moderate ({kappa} = 0.53). The agreement was good or excellent for the hepatic artery ({kappa} = 0.78), the superior mesenteric artery ({kappa} = 0.65), the splenic artery ({kappa} = 0.70), the gastroduodenal artery ({kappa} = 0.74), the portal vein ({kappa} = 1), the superior mesenteric vein ({kappa} = 0.88), and the splenic vein ({kappa} = 0.75). There was poor agreement for the distal arteries such as the intrahepatic arteries ({kappa} = 0.01) and the branches of the superior mesenteric artery ({kappa} = 0.14). The distal arteries were better visualized on conventional angiography. The agreement between the two primary observers was good ({kappa} = 0.76). No vessel was considered normal by one observer and abnormal by the other observer. However, in eight cases discrepancies occurred between the two observers; one observer concluded that MR angiograms had no diagnostic value for a given vessel, whereas this vessel was considered normal by the other observer. Conventional angiography confirmed a normal pattern of these vessels.

MR angiography depicted a left hepatic artery arising from the left gastric artery in four patients, whereas conventional angiography depicted this variant in two patients. MR angiography and conventional angiography showed a right hepatic artery arising from the superiormesentericarteryinfivepatients(Fig. 1A,1B,1C), ananeurysmofthehepaticarteryinonepatient, a stenosis of the gastroduodenal artery in threepatients,astenosisofthesplenicarteryin two patients (Fig. 2A,2B), and a segmental thrombosis of the superior mesenteric artery in one patient (Fig. 3A,3B,3C,3D). Nine venous thromboses involvingeithertheportalvein (n = 2), the superior mesenteric vein (n = 2) (Fig. 4A,4B), or the splenic vein (n = 5) were depicted on MR angiography and conventional angiography. In one patient the splenic vein was not depicted on MR angiography but was visible on conventional angiography.



View larger version (137K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1A. —Hepatic cirrhosis in 48-year-old man. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold MR angiogram shows left hepatic artery (arrow) arising from left gastric artery and right hepatic artery (arrowhead) arising from superior mesenteric artery.

 


View larger version (136K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1B .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 48-year-old man. Conventional angiography with selective catheterization of left gastric artery reveals pattern in left gastric artery (arrow) similar to that seen in A.

 


View larger version (156K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1C .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 48-year-old man. Conventional angiography with selective catheterization of right hepatic artery shows it (arrow) arising from superior mesenteric artery.

 


View larger version (135K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2A .—Pancreatic adenocarcinoma in 67-year-old woman. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold MR angiogram shows stenosis (arrow) of splenic artery.

 


View larger version (159K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2B .—Pancreatic adenocarcinoma in 67-year-old woman. Conventional angiogram reveals stenosis (arrow) seen in A.

 


View larger version (132K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3A .—Mesenteric ischemia in 26-year-old woman.

A and B, Gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiograms show segmental occlusion of superior mesenteric artery (large arrow, A). Distal part of the superior mesenteric artery (small arrow, A) is revascularized by arc of Riolan (arrowheads, A and B).

 


View larger version (156K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3B .—Mesenteric ischemia in 26-year-old woman.

A and B, Gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiograms show segmental occlusion of superior mesenteric artery (large arrow, A). Distal part of the superior mesenteric artery (small arrow, A) is revascularized by arc of Riolan (arrowheads, A and B).

 


View larger version (167K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3C .—Mesenteric ischemia in 26-year-old woman.

C and D, Conventional angiograms with selective catheterization of superior mesenteric artery (arrow, D) and inferior mesenteric artery (arrowhead, C) reveal pattern similar to that seen in A and B.

 


View larger version (163K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3D .—Mesenteric ischemia in 26-year-old woman.

C and D, Conventional angiograms with selective catheterization of superior mesenteric artery (arrow, D) and inferior mesenteric artery (arrowhead, C) reveal pattern similar to that seen in A and B.

 


View larger version (109K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4A .—Pancreatitis in 61-year-old man. Venous contrast-enhanced MR angiogram shows occlusion of upper part of superior mesenteric vein (arrow) with collateral circulation through first jejunal vein (arrowhead) feeding the portal vein.

 


View larger version (172K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4B .—Pancreatitis in 61-year-old man. Conventional angiogram reveals pat-

 

In most cases, it was not possible to make a diagnosis for the intrahepatic arteries and the branches of the superior mesenteric artery on MR angiography, but this was possible on conventional angiography. For the other vessels, MR angiography allowed a diagnosis in more than 88% of the cases and conventional angiography allowed a diagnosis in more than 94% of the cases (Table 2). All vascular abnormalities evidenced on conventional angiography were also depicted on MR angiography. All vessels considered normal on MR angiography were also considered normal on conventional angiography (Table 2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 2 Diagnostic Results of Contrast-Enhanced Breath-Hold MR Angiography and Conventional Angiography

 

MR angiography depicted the left gastric (coronary) vein in 19 patients and other portosystemic collaterals in 10 patients (Fig. 5A,5B). Conventional angiography depicted the left gastric vein in 18 patients ({kappa} = 0.93) and other portosystemic collaterals in 9 patients ({kappa} = 0.92).



View larger version (170K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5A .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 53-year-old woman. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold MR angiogram shows gastric varices (arrow) arising from left gastric vein.

 


View larger version (187K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5B .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 53-year-old woman. Conventional angiogram reveals portosystemic collateral

 


Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 
MR angiography was seldom used in the past for the evaluation of the mesenteric circulation [1, 2, 18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. With time-of-flight and phase contrast MR angiography, respiration-induced motion of abdominal vessels caused a blurring that precluded a high image quality for the abdominal vessels [3]. Then the use of time-of-flight or phase contrast MR angiography was mainly limited to the portal venous system [1, 18,19,20,21,22,23]. The development of breath-hold MR angiography with gadolinium enhancement has increased the quality of abdominal MR angiography [3]. The first abdominal applications of breath-hold gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography were the aorta and the renal arteries [3, 7, 25]. The results of this method in the study of the mesenteric, hepatic, and portal vessels have rarely been evaluated [9,10,11,12, 14].

In our study, the image quality was good for all vessels except small arteries such as the intrahepatic arteries and branches of the superior mesenteric artery, which are better depicted on conventional angiography. This image quality can probably be explained by the use of a power injector [26] and a short acquisition time (13 sec) that allowed a breath-hold acquisition and a decrease in motion artifacts [3]. Another advantage of fast abdominal MR angiography is the possibility of having several consecutive acquisitions repeated at short intervals, thus obtaining an arterial phase without any venous overlap in most cases (82%). During the subsequent phases, overlapping of the arteries on the veins occurred in 94% of our patients. The phases during which overlapping occurs are actually not pure portal phases but mixed arterioportal phases [9]; however, arterial images can easily be eliminated by subtracting an arterial phase from a mixed arterioportal phase. We obtained a pure portal phase in 85% of the patients. This postprocessing was useful for differentiating venous images from arterial images, and particularly for evaluating portocaval anastomoses.

In our study, MR angiography depicted all arterial abnormalities and variations diagnosed with conventional angiography. These results suggest that MR angiography is as sensitive as conventional angiography for evaluating the main mesenteric arteries. The advantage of gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography for mesenteric, hepatic, and splenic arteries was previously described in only a few studies [9, 11, 14] with few comparisons between the results of MR angiography and those of conventional angiography [11, 14]. Stafford-Johnson et al. [11] showed that gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography can depict vascular complications of liver transplantation, and Meaney et al. [14] showed that this technique is useful in the evaluation of patients with suspected mesenteric ischemia. The relatively low number of arterial lesions and stenoses in our study is probably a limitation of the study. Additional studies will help to further evaluate the accuracy of MR angiography in quantifying mesenteric artery stenosis, as has been done for the renal arteries [27]. In our study, arteries were hidden by veins in one patient because the arterial phase occurred between the second and the third acquisitions. To decrease the effects caused by the variations of the blood circulation, the time interval between two acquisitions can be reduced from 17 to 6 sec [9]. In our study, MR angiography showed two more left hepatic arteries arising from the left gastric artery than did conventional angiography. This is because the left gastric artery was not selectively catheterized in all patients during conventional arteriography, and all aberrant arteries included in the volume of interest can be depicted through MR angiography.

In our study, there was good agreement between conventional angiography and MR angiography in the depiction of venous abnormalities. Patency or thrombosis of the superior mesenteric vein, the portal vein, and the splenic vein was accurately depicted in all but one patient. In one patient, the patent splenic vein was not visualized on maximum-intensity-projection or source images because an aliasing artifact redisplayed the subcutaneous fat of the anterior abdominal wall on the splenic vein. This artifact can be avoided by increasing the slab thickness to 150 mm. Similar results were obtained in other studies by using either time-of-flight MR angiography [20, 22], phase contrast MR angiography [18, 21], or contrast-enhanced MR angiography [11, 12, 28]. Portosystemic collaterals were also clearly depicted on MR angiography in our study, as in previous studies [19, 22, 23]. The main advantage of dynamic breath-hold MR angiography over other MR angiography techniques is the possibility of eliminating the signal of the arteries by subtracting the arterial phase from the arterioportal phase. The images obtained with this postprocessing are similar to those obtained by conventional angiography with catheterization of the splenic and superior mesenteric arteries.

The efficacy of gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography in our study is shown by the good agreement between the results of MR angiography and those of selective digital subtraction angiography with a 1024 x 1024 matrix for the proximal arteries and the main veins. However, conventional angiography was more diagnostic than MR angiography for the intrahepatic arteries and the branches of the superior mesenteric artery (Fig. 6A,6B,6C). Therefore, the results of MR angiography are still insufficient for the distal arteries. This can be explained by the difference in spatial resolution between both techniques; the pixel size is 1.4 x 2.2 mm for MR angiography and less than 0.5 x 0.5 mm for digital subtraction angiography.



View larger version (122K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6A .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 55-year-old man. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold MR angiogram shows superior mesenteric artery (arrowhead), proper hepatic artery (long arrow), and left hepatic artery (short arrow) arising from left gastric artery.

 


View larger version (122K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6B .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 55-year-old man. Conventional angiography with selective catheterization of proper hepatic artery reveals hepatic artery branches not shown on the MR angiogram.

 


View larger version (133K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6C .—Hepatic cirrhosis in 55-year-old man. Conventional angiography with selective catheterization of superior mesenteric artery reveals several arterial branches not shown on MR angiogram.

 

In conclusion, our data indicate that MR angiography correctly predicted all arterial abnormalities and anatomic variants identified with conventional angiography in our study. Though proximal arterial pathology was limited in our study, we have concluded that breath-hold abdominal MR angiography appears to be sufficient for preoperative evaluation of the main mesenteric arteries and veins. This will need to be confirmed in a larger study. Moreover, breath-hold abdominal angiography can supplement standard MR examination or MR cholangiopancreatography when performed in patients with hepatic, pancreatic, or biliary disease with suspected vascular involvement. This procedure might be particularly useful after liver transplantation because it enables an examination for vascular anastomoses and biliary anastomosis. Dynamic MR angiography can also be used to evaluate the portal venous system and the portocaval anastomoses in cases of portal hypertension. However, conventional angiography is still necessary to evaluate distal arteries such as intrahepatic arteries and superior mesenteric branches.


Acknowledgments
 
We thank John Hall for manuscript preparation and editorial assistance.


References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods Patients
MR Angiography
Conventional Angiography
Image Analysis
Statistical Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
 

  1. Nghiem HV, Freeny PC, Winter TC III, Mack LA, Yuan C. Phase-contrast MR angiography of the portal venous system: preoperative findings in liver transplant recipients. AJR 1994; 163 :445-450[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Wasser MN, Geelkerken RH, Kouwenhoven M, et al. A systolically gated 3D phase contrast MRA of mesenteric arteries in suspected mesenteric ischemia. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996;20:262-268[Medline]
  3. Prince MR, Narasimham DL, Stanley JC, et al. Breath-hold gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the abdominal aorta and its major branches. Radiology 1995; 197 : 785-792[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Shetty AN, Shirkhoda A, Bis KG, Alcantara A. Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR angiography in a single breath-hold: a novel technique. AJR 1995; 165: 1290 -1292[Free Full Text]
  5. Leung DA, McKinnon GC, Davis CP, Pfammatter T, Krestin GP, Debatin JF. Breath-hold, contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional MR angiography. Radiology 1996; 200: 569 -571[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Rieumont MJ, Kaufman JA, Geller SC, et al. Evaluation of renal artery stenosis with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. AJR 1997; 169: 39 -44[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Holland GA, Dougherty L, Carpenter JP, et al. Breath-hold ultrafast three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the aorta and the renal and other visceral abdominal arteries. AJR 1996; 166: 971 -981[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Bakker J, Beek FJ, Beutler JJ, et al. Renal artery stenosis and accessory renal arteries: accuracy of detection and visualization with gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography. Radiology 1998; 207: 497 -504[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Shirkhoda A, Konez O, Shetty AN, Bis KG, Ellwood RA, Kirsch MJ. Mesenteric circulation: three-dimensional MR angiography with a gadolinium-enhanced multiecho gradient-echo technique. Radiology 1997; 202: 257 -261[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Yamashita Y, Mitsuzaki K, Miyazaki T, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced breath-hold three-dimensional MR angiography of the portal vein: value of the magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient-echo sequence. Radiology 1996; 201: 283 -288[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Stafford-Johnson DB, Hamilton BH, Dong Q, et al. Vascular complications of liver transplantation: evaluation with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 1998; 207 : 153-160[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Rodgers PM, Ward J, Baudouin CJ, Ridgway JP, Robinson PJ. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the portal venous system: comparison with x-ray angiography. Radiology 1994; 191 : 741-745[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Suto Y, Ohuchi Y, Kimura T, Takizawa O, Ohta Y. Single breath-holding three-dimensional magnetic resonance portography with bolus injection of Gd-DTPA in subjects with normal liver: a comparison with two-dimensional time-of-flight technique. Br J Radiol 1994; 67: 1078 -1082[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Meaney JF, Prince MR, Nostrant TT, Stanley JC. Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of visceral arteries in patients with suspected chronic mesenteric ischemia. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7: 171 -176[Medline]
  15. Hany TF, Schmidt M, Schoenenberger AW, Debatin J. Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional magnetic resonance angiography of the splanchnic vasculature before and after caloric stimulation: original investigation. Invest Radiol 1998; 33: 682 -686[Medline]
  16. Gilfeather M, Holland GA, Siegelman ES, et al. Gadolinium-enhanced ultrafast three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging of the abdominal aorta and visceral and iliac vessels. Radio-Graphics 1997; 17: 423 -432[Abstract]
  17. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33 : 159-174[Medline]
  18. Silverman JM, Podesta L, Villamil F, et al. Portal vein patency in candidates for liver transplantation: MR angiographic analysis. Radiology 1995; 197: 147 -152[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Ono N, Toyonaga A, Nishimura H, Hayabuchi N, Tanikawa K. Evaluation of magnetic resonance angiography on portosystemic collaterals in cirrhotic patients. Am J Gastroenterol 1997; 92 : 1515-1519[Medline]
  20. Hughes LA, Hartnell GG, Finn JP, et al. Time-of-flight MR angiography of the portal venous system: value compared with other imaging procedures. AJR 1996; 166 : 375-378[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Nghiem HV, Winter TC III, Mountford MC, et al. Evaluation of the portal venous system before liver transplantation: value of phase-contrast MR angiography. AJR 1995; 164 : 871-878[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Finn JP, Kane RA, Edelman RR, et al. Imaging of the portal venous system in patients with cirrhosis: MR angiography vs duplex Doppler sonography. AJR 1993; 161 : 989-994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Johnson CD, Ehman RL, Rakela J, Ilstrup DM. MR angiography in portal hypertension: detection of varices and imaging techniques. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991; 15 : 578-584[Medline]
  24. Li KC, Whitney WS, McDonnell CH, et al. Chronic mesenteric ischemia: evaluation with phase-contrast cine MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 190: 175 -179[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Prince MR, Chenevert TL, Foo TK, Londy FJ, Ward JS, Maki JH. Contrast-enhanced abdominal MR angiography: optimization of imaging delay time by automating the detection of contrast material arrival in the aorta. Radiology 1997; 203: 109 -114[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Earls JP, Rofsky NM, DeCorato DR, Krinsky GA, Weinreb JC. Breath-hold single-dose gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional MR aortography: usefulness of a timing examination and MR power injector. Radiology 1996; 201: 705 -710[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Hany TF, Debatin JF, Leung DA, Pfammatter T. Evaluation of the aortoiliac and renal arteries: comparison of breath-hold, contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional MR angiography with conventional catheter angiography. Radiology 1997; 204: 357 -362[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. McFarland EG, Kaufman JA, Saini S, et al. Preoperative staging of cancer of the pancreas: value of MR angiography versus conventional angiography in detecting portal venous invasion. AJR

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. Ito, S. Koike, A. Shimizu, M. Tanabe, C. Jo, M. Miyazaki, and N. Matsunaga
Portal Venous System: Evaluation with Unenhanced MR Angiography with a Single-Breath-Hold ECG-Synchronized 3D Half-Fourier Fast Spin-Echo Sequence
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): 550 - 554.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
A. H. M. Caiado, R. Blasbalg, A. S. Z. Marcelino, M. da Cunha Pinho, M. C. Chammas, C. da Costa Leite, G. G. Cerri, A. C. de Oliveira, T. Bacchella, and M. C. C. Machado
Complications of Liver Transplantation: Multimodality Imaging Approach
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2007; 27(5): 1401 - 1417.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. S. Kim, T. K. Kim, D. J. Jung, J. H. Kim, I. Y. Bae, K.-B. Sung, P. N. Kim, H. K. Ha, S. G. Lee, and M.-G. Lee
Vascular Complications After Living Related Liver Transplantation: Evaluation with Gadolinium-Enhanced Three-Dimensional MR Angiography
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2003; 181(2): 467 - 474.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
F. Cognet, D. B. Salem, M. Dranssart, J.-P. Cercueil, M. Weiller, E. Tatou, L. Boyer, and D. Krause
Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia: Imaging and Percutaneous Treatment
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2002; 22(4): 863 - 879.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
J. F. Glockner
Three-dimensional Gadolinium-enhanced MR Angiography: Applications for Abdominal Imaging
RadioGraphics, March 1, 2001; 21(2): 357 - 370.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, O.
Right arrow Articles by L'Herminé, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, O.
Right arrow Articles by L'Herminé, C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS