2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.09.030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accuracy of Noncontrast Quiescent-Interval Single-Shot Lower Extremity MR Angiography Versus CT Angiography for Diagnosis of Peripheral Artery Disease

Abstract: Noncontrast QISS-MRA provides high diagnostic accuracy compared with DSA, while being less prone to image artifacts than CTA. QISS better visualizes heavily calcified segments with impaired flow. QISS-MRA obviates the need for contrast administration in PAD patients.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
38
0
10

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
38
0
10
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, the majority of segments excluded from CTA (7 of 8) due to heavy calcifications were diagnostic with QISS. Furthermore, QISS diagnostically visualized all of the segments that were excluded from CTA due to insufficient opacification [32]. These results support the use of QISS for the diagnosis of PAD, particularly in patients with diffuse calcific disease, and underscore its utility in patients for whom contrast is contraindicated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Interestingly, the majority of segments excluded from CTA (7 of 8) due to heavy calcifications were diagnostic with QISS. Furthermore, QISS diagnostically visualized all of the segments that were excluded from CTA due to insufficient opacification [32]. These results support the use of QISS for the diagnosis of PAD, particularly in patients with diffuse calcific disease, and underscore its utility in patients for whom contrast is contraindicated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…In a study of 30 patients with PAD, the ability to detect clinically significant stenosis was compared between third-generation, dual-source, dual-energy CTA and 1.5T QISS MRA with DSA as the reference standard. Two readers analyzed 483 total segments, of which DSA results were also available for 410, and found the subjective image quality to be similar among the two techniques [32]. The diagnostic accuracy among the techniques was also similar; sensitivity/specificity for QISS were 84.9% and 97.2%, while for CTA they were 87.3% and 95.4%.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our MRI evaluation of aortoiliofemoral access routes in 26 patients referred for TAVI planning was based on QISS-MRA measurements. This unenhanced MRA technique was first introduced in 2010 by Edelman et al and until now has been evaluated in a large field of clinical applications at 1.5 T and 3 T [16][17][18][19], mainly for the detection and characterization of lower extremity arterial disease [20][21][22][23][24], and also in the demonstration of the pulmonary embolism [19], for coronary imaging [25], and for intracranial MRA [26].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In nine studies that included a total of 254 patients and used CEMRA as the reference standard examination, QISS provided a median sensitivity of ∼89% and a median specificity of ∼96% (evidence level 1b) . In eight studies with reference to DSA as the gold standard (154 total patients), median values for the sensitivity and specificity of QISS have been ∼91% and ∼96%, respectively (evidence level 1b) . Using either CEMRA or DSA as the reference standard, the median diagnostic sensitivity and specificity values of QISS at 1.5T (174 total patients) are 89% and 96%, respectively; corresponding values at 3.0T (193 total patients) are 92% and 96%, respectively (evidence level 1b).…”
Section: Level Of Evidence For Noncontrast Mramentioning
confidence: 99%