Clinical radiology · 2003
Comparison of high-resolution contrast-enhanced 3D MRA with digital subtraction angiography in the evaluation of hepatic arterial anatomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Matoba M, Tonami H, Kuginuki M, Yokota H, Takashima S, Yamamoto I
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the validity of high-resolution contrast-enhanced three-dimensional magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) in defining hepatic arterial anatomy and to compare this with digital subtraction angiography (DSA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRA and DSA were performed in 30 patients. MRA was performed with breath-hold, gadolinium-enhanced, three-dimensional, fast low-angle shot sequence with a 512 pixel matrix. MRA was compared with DSA in terms of image quality and depiction of hepatic arterial anatomy. The agreement in image quality between MRA and DSA was determined with the kappa statistic.
RESULTS: With respect to image quality, there was excellent or good correlation between MRA and DSA for the common hepatic artery (kappa=0.85), proper hepatic artery (kappa=0.72), gastroduodenal artery (kappa=0.70), left hepatic artery (kappa=0.49), left gastric artery (kappa=0.50), splenic artery (kappa=0.84), and superior mesenteric artery (kappa=0.88). Poor correlation was found for the right hepatic artery (kappa=0.18) and right gastric artery (kappa=0.38). With regard to hepatic arterial anatomy, MRA correlated correctly with DSA in 28 of the 29 cases, i.e. 97% of patients.
CONCLUSION: MRA is a useful technique for the evaluation of the hepatic artery, and for the vast majority of patients, MRA can replace intra-arterial DSA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRA and DSA were performed in 30 patients. MRA was performed with breath-hold, gadolinium-enhanced, three-dimensional, fast low-angle shot sequence with a 512 pixel matrix. MRA was compared with DSA in terms of image quality and depiction of hepatic arterial anatomy. The agreement in image quality between MRA and DSA was determined with the kappa statistic.
RESULTS: With respect to image quality, there was excellent or good correlation between MRA and DSA for the common hepatic artery (kappa=0.85), proper hepatic artery (kappa=0.72), gastroduodenal artery (kappa=0.70), left hepatic artery (kappa=0.49), left gastric artery (kappa=0.50), splenic artery (kappa=0.84), and superior mesenteric artery (kappa=0.88). Poor correlation was found for the right hepatic artery (kappa=0.18) and right gastric artery (kappa=0.38). With regard to hepatic arterial anatomy, MRA correlated correctly with DSA in 28 of the 29 cases, i.e. 97% of patients.
CONCLUSION: MRA is a useful technique for the evaluation of the hepatic artery, and for the vast majority of patients, MRA can replace intra-arterial DSA.