Abstract
Background: Four different techniques for aorto-iliac magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) were assessed for accuracy using a digital subtraction angiography (DSA) gold standard. Surgeons’ confidence in their ability to generate treatment plans with MRA and DSA was assessed, in consultation with a radiologist. Methods: Two different two-dimensional (2D) time-of-flight (TOF) sequences, a phase-contrast sequence, and a contrast-enhanced (CE) MRA sequence were used. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted and areas (A z) calculated from radiologists’ readings. Surgeons’ confidence in their ability to utilize the images for treatment planning was assessed with a 5-point Likert scale. Thirty-six patients were evaluated. Results: CE MRA had a sensitivity, specificity, and A z of .92, .93, and .96, respectively, for stenoses 50% or greater. CE MRA performed better than other sequences, but the improvement compared with gated 2D TOF was not statistically significant. Interobserver agreement for CE MRA and DSA yielded identical Kappa values. Surgeons were most confident in DSA, followed by CE MRA, which was significantly preferred to other techniques. Conclusions: CE MRA closely approximates DSA in terms of diagnostic accuracy. Surgeons considering treatment plans are confident in the CE MRA technique, relative to other MRA methods.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
