Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2352040089
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leiner, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Engelshoven, J. M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Leiner, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Engelshoven, J. M. A.
(Radiology 2005;235:699-708.)
© RSNA, 2005

Vascular and Interventional Radiology

Peripheral Arterial Disease: Comparison of Color Duplex US and Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography for Diagnosis1

Tim Leiner, MD, PhD, Alphons G. H. Kessels, MD, MSc, Patricia J. Nelemans, MD, PhD, G. Boudewijn C. Vasbinder, MD, PhD, Michiel W. de Haan, MD, PhD, Peter E. J. H. M. Kitslaar, MD, PhD, Kai Yiu J. A. M. Ho, MD, PhD, Jan H. M. Tordoir, MD, PhD and Joseph M. A. van Engelshoven, MD, PhD

1 From the Departments of Radiology (T.L., G.B.C.V., M.W.d.H., K.Y.J.A.M.H., J.M.A.v.E.), Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (A.G.H.K.), Epidemiology (P.J.N.), and Vascular Surgery (P.E.J.H.M.K., J.H.M.T.), Maastricht University Hospital, Peter Debijelaan 25, NL-6229 HX Maastricht, the Netherlands; and Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University Medical School, Maastricht, the Netherlands (P.J.N.). From the 2002 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received January 17, 2004; revision requested March 31; revision received May 25; accepted July 1. Supported in part by the Dutch Heart Foundation, grant 98–150. Address correspondence to T.L. (e-mail: leiner@rad.unimaas.nl).

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracies of color duplex ultrasonography (US) and contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography and to assess interobserver agreement regarding contrast-enhanced MR angiographic findings in patients suspected of having peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved the study, and all patients provided signed informed consent. Two hundred ninety-five patients referred for diagnostic and preinterventional work-up of PAD with duplex US also underwent gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. Data sets were reviewed for presence or absence of 50% or greater luminal reduction, which indicated hemodynamically significant stenosis, and to determine interobserver agreement. At duplex US, a peak systolic velocity ratio of 2.5 or greater indicated significant stenosis. Primary outcome measures were differences between duplex US and contrast-enhanced MR angiography in sensitivity and specificity for detection of significant stenosis, as assessed with the McNemar test, and interobserver agreement between the two contrast-enhanced MR angiogram readings, expressed as quadratic weighted {kappa} values. Intraarterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) was the reference standard.

RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine patients had at least one hemodynamically significant stenotic lesion at contrast-enhanced MR angiography, duplex US, or both examinations. One hundred fifty-two patients underwent intraarterial DSA. The quadratic weighted {kappa} for agreement regarding the presence of 50% or greater stenosis at contrast-enhanced MR angiography was 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87, 0.91). Sensitivity of duplex US was 76% (95% CI: 69%, 82%); specificity, 93% (95% CI: 91%, 95%); and accuracy, 89%. Sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced MR angiography were 84% (95% CI: 78%, 89%) and 97% (95% CI: 95%, 98%), respectively; accuracy was 94%. Sensitivity (P = .002) and specificity (P = .03) of contrast-enhanced MR angiography were significantly higher.

CONCLUSION: Results of this prospective comparison between contrast-enhanced MR angiography and duplex US provide evidence that contrast-enhanced MR angiography is more sensitive and specific for diagnosis and preinterventional work-up of PAD.

© RSNA, 2005




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CirculationHome page
M. Schillinger, S. Sabeti, P. Dick, J. Amighi, W. Mlekusch, O. Schlager, C. Loewe, M. Cejna, J. Lammer, and E. Minar
Sustained Benefit at 2 Years of Primary Femoropopliteal Stenting Compared With Balloon Angioplasty With Optional Stenting
Circulation, May 29, 2007; 115(21): 2745 - 2749.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Occup Med (Lond)Home page
A. Thompson and R. House
Hand-arm vibration syndrome with concomitant arterial thrombosis in the hands
Occup. Med., August 1, 2006; 56(5): 317 - 321.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]