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. 3B —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.
