Internal carotid artery stenosis: Accuracy of subjective visual impression for evaluation with digital subtraction angiography and contrast-enhanced MR angiography

被引:11
|
作者
U-King-Im, Jean Marie
Graves, Martin J.
Cross, Justin J.
Higgins, Nicholas J.
Wat, Josephine
Trivedi, Rikin A.
Tang, Tjun
Howarth, Simon P. S.
Kirkpatrick, Peter J.
Antoun, Nagui M.
Gillard, Jonathan H.
机构
[1] Addenbrookes Hosp, Univ Dept Radiol, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, England
[2] Addenbrookes Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, England
关键词
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2441060749
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To prospectively determine, for both digital subtraction angiography ( DSA) and contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance ( MR) angiography, the accuracy of subjective visual impression ( SVI) in the evaluation of internal carotid artery ( ICA) stenosis, with objective caliper measurements serving as the reference standard. Materials and Methods: Local ethics committee approval and written informed patient consent were obtained. A total of 142 symptomatic patients ( 41 women, 101 men; mean age, 70 years; age range, 44 - 89 years) suspected of having ICA stenosis on the basis of Doppler ultrasonographic findings underwent both DSA and contrast- enhanced MR angiography. With each modality, three independent neuroradiologists who were blinded to other test results first visually estimated and subsequently objectively measured stenoses. Diagnostic accuracy and percentage misclassification for correct categorization of 70% - 99% stenosis were calculated for SVI, with objective measurements serving as the reference standard. Interobserver variability was determined with kappa statistics. Results: After exclusion of arteries that were unsuitable for measurement, 180 vessels remained for analysis with DSA and 159 vessels remained for analysis with contrast- enhanced MR angiography. With respect to 70% - 99% stenosis, SVI was associated with average misclassification of 8.9% for DSA ( 8.9%, 7.8%, and 10.0% for readers A, B, and C, respectively) and of 11.7% for contrast- enhanced MR angiography ( 11.3%, 8.8%, and 15.1% for readers A, B, and C, respectively). Negative predictive values were excellent ( 92.3% - 100%). Interobserver variability was higher for SVI ( DSA, kappa = 0.62 - 0.71; contrast-enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.57 - 0.69) than for objective measurements ( DSA, kappa = 0.75 - 0.80; contrast- enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.66 - 0.72). Conclusion: SVI alone is not recommended for evaluation of ICA stenosis with both DSA and contrast- enhanced MR angiography. SVI may be acceptable as an initial screening tool to exclude the presence of 70% - 99% stenosis, but caliper measurements are warranted to confirm the presence of such stenosis. (c) RSNA, 2007.
引用
收藏
页码:213 / 222
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Noninvasive investigation for renal artery stenosis:: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and color Doppler sonography as compared to digital subtraction angiography
    Voiculescu, A
    Hofer, M
    Hetzel, GR
    Malms, J
    Mödder, U
    Grabensee, B
    Hollenbeck, M
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPERTENSION, 2001, 23 (07) : 521 - 531
  • [42] Dose optimization of contrast-enhanced carotid MR angiography
    M. Unterweger
    J. M. Froehlich
    R. A. Kubik-Huch
    B. Seifert
    M. Birrer
    T. Huber
    R. Otto
    European Radiology, 2005, 15 : 1797 - 1805
  • [43] Noninvasive Detection of Vertebral Artery Stenosis A Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography, CT Angiography, and Ultrasound
    Khan, Sofia
    Rich, Philip
    Clifton, Andrew
    Markus, Hugh S.
    STROKE, 2009, 40 (11) : 3499 - 3503
  • [44] Carotid and vertebral artery dissection: Elliptical centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography
    Huston, J
    Phan, TG
    Brown, RD
    Bernstein, MA
    Riederer, SJ
    Fain, SB
    STROKE, 2001, 32 (01) : 344 - 344
  • [45] Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography Is Not More Accurate Than Unenhanced 2D Time-of-Flight MR Angiography for Determining ≥70% Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis
    Babiarz, L. S.
    Romero, J. M.
    Murphy, E. K.
    Brobeck, B.
    Schaefer, P. W.
    Gonzalez, R. G.
    Lev, M. H.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2009, 30 (04) : 761 - 768
  • [46] Overestimation of carotid artery stenosis with magnetic resonance angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography
    Nederkoorn, PJ
    Elgersma, OEH
    Mali, WPTM
    Eikelboom, BC
    Kappelle, LJ
    van der Graaf, Y
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2002, 36 (04) : 806 - 813
  • [47] Hemodialysis access imaging: Comparison of flow-interrupted contrast-enhanced MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography
    Smits, JHM
    Bos, C
    Elgersma, OEH
    van der Mark, WAMA
    Blankestijn, PJ
    Bakker, CJG
    Zijlstra, JJ
    Kalmijn, S
    Mali, WPTM
    RADIOLOGY, 2002, 225 (03) : 829 - 834
  • [48] Detection of thrombosis in the portal venous system: Comparison of contrast-enhanced MR angiography with intraarterial digital subtraction angiography
    Kreft, B
    Strunk, H
    Flacke, S
    Wolff, M
    Conrad, R
    Gieseke, J
    Pauleit, D
    Bachmann, R
    Hirner, A
    Schild, HH
    RADIOLOGY, 2000, 216 (01) : 86 - 92
  • [49] Grading of Carotid Artery Stenosis in the Presence of Extensive Calcifications: Dual-Energy CT Angiography in Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography
    A. Korn
    B. Bender
    H. Brodoefel
    T.-K. Hauser
    S. Danz
    U. Ernemann
    C. Thomas
    Clinical Neuroradiology, 2015, 25 : 33 - 40
  • [50] Grading of Carotid Artery Stenosis in the Presence of Extensive Calcifications: Dual-Energy CT Angiography in Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography
    Korn, A.
    Bender, B.
    Brodoefel, H.
    Hauser, T. -K.
    Danz, S.
    Ernemann, U.
    Thomas, C.
    CLINICAL NEURORADIOLOGY, 2015, 25 (01) : 33 - 40