Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Clinical Interventional Radiology ISVIR 2022; 06(02): 098-105
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1730845
Original Article

Balanced Steady-State Free Precision and Time of Flight Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Peripheral Arterial Disease

Soumya Susan Regi
1   Division of Clinical Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Aparna Irodi
1   Division of Clinical Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Shyamkumar N. Keshava
2   Division of Clinical Radiology, Department of Interventional Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Sunil Agarwal
3   Department of Vascular Surgery, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
› Author Affiliations Funding Nil. pvalue > 0.05 in the aorta, the common femoral, superficial femoral and popliteal arteries, implying that the mean of the scores of the quality in these segments in the NC-MRA and CE-MRA/CTA were statistically not different from each other. pvalue of 0.05 taken as statistically significant. Low p values in the infrapopliteal arteries indicate statistically significant better image quality score on CE-MRA as compared with NC-MRA.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose To determine the diagnostic efficacy of balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) and time-of-flight (TOF)-based noncontrast magnetic resonance angiography (NC-MRA) in lower limb peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

Methods Ten patients with suspected PAD underwent both NC-MRA (bSSFP and 2D TOF) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA)/CT angiography (CTA). A total of 170 arterial segments (17 segments in each patient) were analyzed on NC-MRA and compared with CE-MRA/CTA for quality of images and for estimating the degree of stenoses. Image quality was graded as 1—poor, 2—fair, 3—good, and 4—excellent. The degree of stenoses was graded as 0—normal, 1— < 50% narrowing, 2— > 50% narrowing, 3—near complete/100% occlusion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of NC-MRA in identifying significant stenosis, as compared with CE-MRA/CTA, were estimated.

Results a) Mean grade of the image quality of NC-MRA was 3.10 and the CE-MRA/CTA was 3.64. b) The agreement in the estimation of the degree of stenosis on NC-MRA as compared with CE-MRA/CTA was substantial in aortoiliac segments (weighted kappa 0.646 [95% CI] [0.361–0.931] [p < 0.001]), almost perfect in femoropopliteal segments (weighted kappa 0.911 [95% CI] [0.79–1.032] [p < 0.001]), and poor in infrapopliteal segments (weighted kappa 0.052 [95% CI] [0.189–0.293] [p < 0.33587]).

Conclusion TOF and bSSFP-based NC-MRA was found to be comparable to the CE-MRA/CTA in the evaluation of PAD in lower limbs in the aortoiliac and femoropopliteal regions. NC-MRA was especially helpful in assessing the aortoiliac vessels and femoropopliteal vessels, with the imaging of infrapopliteal arteries being suboptimal.

Keywords

noncontrast magnetic resonance angiography - MRA - peripheral arterial disease


Publication History

Article published online:
06 July 2021

© 2021. Indian Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Al-Rudaini HEA, Han P, Liang H. Comparison between computed tomography angiography and digital subtraction angiography in critical lower limb ischemia. Curr Med Imaging Rev 2019; 15 (05) 496-503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Edelman RR, Koktzoglou I. Noncontrast MR angiography: an update. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 49 (02) 355-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hirsch AT, Haskal ZJ, Hertzer NR. et al. American Association for Vascular Surgery; Society for Vascular Surgery; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology; Society of Interventional Radiology; ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines Writing Committee to Develop Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease; American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Society for Vascular Nursing; TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus; Vascular Disease Foundation. ACC/AHA 2005 Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (lower extremity, renal, mesenteric, and abdominal aortic): a collaborative report from the American Association for Vascular Surgery/Society for Vascular Surgery, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology, and the ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Develop Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease): endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Society for Vascular Nursing; TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus; and Vascular Disease Foundation. Circulation 2006; 113 (11) e463-e654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Thierfelder KM, Meimarakis G, Nikolaou K. et al. Non-contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 3 Tesla in patients with advanced peripheral arterial occlusive disease. PLoS One 2014; 9 (03) e91078
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ersoy H, Rybicki FJ. MR angiography of the lower extremities. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190 (06) 1675-1684
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Aboyans V, Ricco J-B, Bartelink MEL. et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed by: the European Stroke Organization (ESO)The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J 2018; 39 (09) 763-816
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gerhard-Herman MD, Gornik HL, Barrett C. et al. 2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69 (11) 1465-1508
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Costello JR, Kalb B, Martin DR. Incidence and risk factors for gadolinium-based contrast agent immediate reactions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2016; 25 (06) 257-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Agarwal R, Brunelli SM, Williams K, Mitchell MD, Feldman HI, Umscheid CA. Gadolinium-based contrast agents and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24 (03) 856-863
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Leisman S. Radiocontrast toxicity. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2020; 27 (01) 50-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Woolen SA, Shankar PR, Gagnier JJ, MacEachern MP, Singer L, Davenport MS. Risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in patients with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease receiving a group ii gadolinium-based contrast agent: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2020; 180 (02) 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Leiner T. Magnetic resonance angiography of abdominal and lower extremity vasculature. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 16 (01) 21-66
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 François CJ, Tuite D, Deshpande V, Jerecic R, Weale P, Carr JC. Unenhanced MR angiography of the thoracic aorta: initial clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190 (04) 902-906
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Van F Grimberge, Dymarkowski S, Budts W, Bogaert J. Role of magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of subclavian steal syndrome. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12 (02) 339-342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Miyazaki M, Sugiura S, Tateishi F, Wada H, Kassai Y, Abe H. Non-contrast-enhanced MR angiography using 3D ECG-synchronized half-Fourier fast spin echo. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12 (05) 776-783
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012; 22 (03) 276-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005; 37 (05) 360-363
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 U-King-Im JM, Young V, Gillard JH. Carotid-artery imaging in the diagnosis and management of patients at risk of stroke. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8 (06) 569-580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Mathew RC, Kramer CM. Recent advances in magnetic resonance imaging for peripheral artery disease. Vasc Med 2018; 23 (02) 143-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Morita S, Masukawa A, Suzuki K, Hirata M, Kojima S, Ueno E. Unenhanced MR angiography: techniques and clinical applications in patients with chronic kidney disease. Radiographics 2011; 31 (02) E13-E33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Foo TKF, Ho VB, Marcos HB, Hood MN, Choyke PL. MR angiography using steady-state free precession. Magn Reson Med 2002; 48 (04) 699-706
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Stuber M, Hoogeveen R, Günther RW, Buecker A. Free-breathing renal magnetic resonance angiography with steady-state free-precession and slab-selective spin inversion combined with radial k-space sampling and water-selective excitation. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53 (05) 1228-1233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Scheffler K, Lehnhardt S. Principles and applications of balanced SSFP techniques. Eur Radiol 2003; 13 (11) 2409-2418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cardia PP, Penachim TJ, Prando A, Torres US, D'Ippólito G. Non-contrast MR angiography using three-dimensional balanced steady-state free-precession imaging for evaluation of stenosis in the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery: a preliminary comparative study with computed tomography angiography. Br J Radiol 2017; 90 (10/75) 20170011
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Perry JT, Statler JD. Advances in vascular imaging. Surg Clin North Am 2007; 87 (05) 975-993, vii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Suttmeyer B, Teichgräber U, Thomas A. et al. Non-invasive ECG-triggered 2D TOF MR angiography of the pelvic and leg arteries in an open 1.0-tesla high-field MRI system in comparison to conventional DSA. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2014; 59 (01) 29-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Gozzi M, Amorico MG, Colopi S. et al. Peripheral arterial occlusive disease: role of MR angiography. Radiol Med (Torino) 2006; 111 (02) 225-237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Nelemans PJ, Leiner T, de Vet HCW, van Engelshoven JMA. Peripheral arterial disease: meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of MR angiography. Radiology 2000; 217 (01) 105-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Maki JH, Wilson GJ, Eubank WB, Glickerman DJ, Millan JA, Hoogeveen RM. Navigator-gated MR angiography of the renal arteries: a potential screening tool for renal artery stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188 (06) W540-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Wyttenbach R, Braghetti A, Wyss M. et al. Renal artery assessment with nonenhanced steady-state free precession versus contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 2007; 245 (01) 186-195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lanzman RS, Voiculescu A, Walther C. et al. ECG-gated nonenhanced 3D steady-state free precession MR angiography in assessment of transplant renal arteries: comparison with DSA. Radiology 2009; 252 (03) 914-921
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lanzman RS, Kröpil P, Schmitt P. et al. Nonenhanced free-breathing ECG-gated steady-state free precession 3D MR angiography of the renal arteries: comparison between 1.5 T and 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194 (03) 794-798
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Edelman RR, Silvers RI, Thakrar KH. et al. Nonenhanced MR angiography of the pulmonary arteries using single-shot radial quiescent-interval slice-selective (QISS): a technical feasibility study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2017; 19 (01) 48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Hanrahan CJ, Lindley MD, Mueller M. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast mr angiography protocols at 3T for the detection and characterization of lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2018; 29 (11) 1585-1594.e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Varga-Szemes A, Wichmann JL, Schoepf UJ. et al. Accuracy of noncontrast quiescent-interval single-shot lower extremity mr angiography versus ct angiography for diagnosis of peripheral artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2017; 10 (10) 1116-1124
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Wu G, Yang J, Zhang T. et al. The diagnostic value of non-contrast enhanced quiescent interval single shot (QISS) magnetic resonance angiography at 3T for lower extremity peripheral arterial disease, in comparison to CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2016; 18 (01) 71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Cavallo AU, Koktzoglou I, Edelman RR. et al. Noncontrast magnetic resonance angiography for the diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2019; 12 (05) e008844
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar