Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Neuroradiology. 2008 Nov;50(11):947-54. doi: 10.1007/s00234-008-0429-z. Epub 2008 Aug 21.

Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with detachable coils: comparison of 3D inflow MRA at 3T and 1.5T and contrast-enhanced MRA at 3T with DSA.

Author information

1
Department of Neuroradiology, Center for Medical Imaging and Physiology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. birgitta.ramgren@skane.se

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

The purpose of this prospective study was to compare 3T and 1.5T magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for the follow-up of endovascular treated intracranial aneurysms to assess the grade of occlusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Thirty-seven patients with 41 aneurysms who had undergone endovascular treatment with detachable coils were included. MRA was performed on the same day using an eight-channel sensitivity encoding head-coil with 3D axial inflow technique. At 3T, a contrast-enhanced transverse 3D fast gradient echo acquisition was also performed. Most patients underwent DSA the following day. MRA scans and DSA were classified first independently by two neuroradiologists and an interventional neuroradiologist. Secondly, a consensus was done. Source images, maximum intensity projection, multiplanar reconstruction and volume rendering reconstructions were used for MRA evaluations. A modification of the Raymond classification, previously used for DSA evaluation of recanalization, was used.

RESULTS:

Statistical comparison of the consensus showed that 3T MRA with 3D axial inflow technique had better agreement with DSA (kappa = 0.43) than 1.5T MRA(kappa = 0.21) and contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) at 3T (kappa = 0.17). The susceptibility artefacts from the coil mesh were significally smaller at 3T (p = 0.002-0.007) than at 1.5T.

CONCLUSION:

3T MRA, using a sensitivity encoding head-coil, showed better agreement with DSA than 1.5T and CE-MRA at 3T for evaluation of aneurysms treated with endovascular coiling.

PMID:
18716766
DOI:
10.1007/s00234-008-0429-z
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center