A prospective trial of 3T and 1.5T time-of-flight and contrast-enhanced mr angiography in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

54 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms are increasingly being followed up with noninvasive MRA imaging to evaluate for aneurysm recurrences. It has not been well-established which MRA techniques are best for this application, however. Our aim was to prospectively compare 4 MRA techniques, TOF and CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T, to a reference standard of DSA in the evaluation of previously endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects with 63 previously coiled intracranial aneurysms underwent all 4 MRA techniques within 8 days of DSA. There were 2 outcome variables: coil occlusion class (class 1, complete; class 2, dog ear; class 3, residual neck; class 4, aneurysm filling) and change in degree of occlusion since the previous comparison. Sensitivity and specificity were computed for each MRA technique relative to the reference standard of DSA. Differences among the MRA techniques were evaluated in pair-wise fashion by using the McNemar test. RESULTS: For the detection of any aneurysm remnant, the sensitivity was 85%-90% for all MRA techniques. Sensitivity dropped to 50%-67% when calculated for the detection of only the class 3 and 4 aneurysm remnants, because several class 3 and 4 remnants were misclassified as class 2 by MRA. CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T misclassified fewer of the class 3 and 4 remnants than did TOF-MRA at 1.5T, as reflected by the significantly greater sensitivity for larger aneurysm remnants with CE-MRA relative to TOF-MRA at 1.5T (P = .0455 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: CE-MRA is more likely than TOF-MRA to classify larger aneurysm remnants appropriately. We recommend performing both CE-MRA and TOF-MRA in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms and at 3T if available.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)912-918
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology
Volume31
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2010

Fingerprint

Intracranial Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Angiography
Ear
Neck
Dogs
Recurrence
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{670a2cf7c22e4f93aa87466719e92c2b,
title = "A prospective trial of 3T and 1.5T time-of-flight and contrast-enhanced mr angiography in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms are increasingly being followed up with noninvasive MRA imaging to evaluate for aneurysm recurrences. It has not been well-established which MRA techniques are best for this application, however. Our aim was to prospectively compare 4 MRA techniques, TOF and CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T, to a reference standard of DSA in the evaluation of previously endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects with 63 previously coiled intracranial aneurysms underwent all 4 MRA techniques within 8 days of DSA. There were 2 outcome variables: coil occlusion class (class 1, complete; class 2, dog ear; class 3, residual neck; class 4, aneurysm filling) and change in degree of occlusion since the previous comparison. Sensitivity and specificity were computed for each MRA technique relative to the reference standard of DSA. Differences among the MRA techniques were evaluated in pair-wise fashion by using the McNemar test. RESULTS: For the detection of any aneurysm remnant, the sensitivity was 85{\%}-90{\%} for all MRA techniques. Sensitivity dropped to 50{\%}-67{\%} when calculated for the detection of only the class 3 and 4 aneurysm remnants, because several class 3 and 4 remnants were misclassified as class 2 by MRA. CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T misclassified fewer of the class 3 and 4 remnants than did TOF-MRA at 1.5T, as reflected by the significantly greater sensitivity for larger aneurysm remnants with CE-MRA relative to TOF-MRA at 1.5T (P = .0455 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: CE-MRA is more likely than TOF-MRA to classify larger aneurysm remnants appropriately. We recommend performing both CE-MRA and TOF-MRA in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms and at 3T if available.",
author = "Kaufmann, {Timothy J} and Huston, {John III} and Cloft, {H. J.} and Jayawant Mandrekar and L. Gray and Bernstein, {Matthew A} and Atkinson, {J. L.} and Kallmes, {David F}",
year = "2010",
month = "5",
doi = "10.3174/ajnr.A1932",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "912--918",
journal = "American Journal of Neuroradiology",
issn = "0195-6108",
publisher = "American Society of Neuroradiology",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective trial of 3T and 1.5T time-of-flight and contrast-enhanced mr angiography in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms

AU - Kaufmann, Timothy J

AU - Huston, John III

AU - Cloft, H. J.

AU - Mandrekar, Jayawant

AU - Gray, L.

AU - Bernstein, Matthew A

AU - Atkinson, J. L.

AU - Kallmes, David F

PY - 2010/5

Y1 - 2010/5

N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms are increasingly being followed up with noninvasive MRA imaging to evaluate for aneurysm recurrences. It has not been well-established which MRA techniques are best for this application, however. Our aim was to prospectively compare 4 MRA techniques, TOF and CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T, to a reference standard of DSA in the evaluation of previously endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects with 63 previously coiled intracranial aneurysms underwent all 4 MRA techniques within 8 days of DSA. There were 2 outcome variables: coil occlusion class (class 1, complete; class 2, dog ear; class 3, residual neck; class 4, aneurysm filling) and change in degree of occlusion since the previous comparison. Sensitivity and specificity were computed for each MRA technique relative to the reference standard of DSA. Differences among the MRA techniques were evaluated in pair-wise fashion by using the McNemar test. RESULTS: For the detection of any aneurysm remnant, the sensitivity was 85%-90% for all MRA techniques. Sensitivity dropped to 50%-67% when calculated for the detection of only the class 3 and 4 aneurysm remnants, because several class 3 and 4 remnants were misclassified as class 2 by MRA. CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T misclassified fewer of the class 3 and 4 remnants than did TOF-MRA at 1.5T, as reflected by the significantly greater sensitivity for larger aneurysm remnants with CE-MRA relative to TOF-MRA at 1.5T (P = .0455 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: CE-MRA is more likely than TOF-MRA to classify larger aneurysm remnants appropriately. We recommend performing both CE-MRA and TOF-MRA in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms and at 3T if available.

AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms are increasingly being followed up with noninvasive MRA imaging to evaluate for aneurysm recurrences. It has not been well-established which MRA techniques are best for this application, however. Our aim was to prospectively compare 4 MRA techniques, TOF and CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T, to a reference standard of DSA in the evaluation of previously endovascularly coiled intracranial aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight subjects with 63 previously coiled intracranial aneurysms underwent all 4 MRA techniques within 8 days of DSA. There were 2 outcome variables: coil occlusion class (class 1, complete; class 2, dog ear; class 3, residual neck; class 4, aneurysm filling) and change in degree of occlusion since the previous comparison. Sensitivity and specificity were computed for each MRA technique relative to the reference standard of DSA. Differences among the MRA techniques were evaluated in pair-wise fashion by using the McNemar test. RESULTS: For the detection of any aneurysm remnant, the sensitivity was 85%-90% for all MRA techniques. Sensitivity dropped to 50%-67% when calculated for the detection of only the class 3 and 4 aneurysm remnants, because several class 3 and 4 remnants were misclassified as class 2 by MRA. CE-MRA at 1.5T and 3T misclassified fewer of the class 3 and 4 remnants than did TOF-MRA at 1.5T, as reflected by the significantly greater sensitivity for larger aneurysm remnants with CE-MRA relative to TOF-MRA at 1.5T (P = .0455 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: CE-MRA is more likely than TOF-MRA to classify larger aneurysm remnants appropriately. We recommend performing both CE-MRA and TOF-MRA in the follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms and at 3T if available.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77952366185&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77952366185&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3174/ajnr.A1932

DO - 10.3174/ajnr.A1932

M3 - Article

C2 - 20019107

AN - SCOPUS:77952366185

VL - 31

SP - 912

EP - 918

JO - American Journal of Neuroradiology

JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology

SN - 0195-6108

IS - 5

ER -