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


     


Published online before print October 17, 2002, 10.1148/radiol.2253010879
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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 Smits, J. H. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mali, W. P. T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smits, J. H. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mali, W. P. T. M.

Hemodialysis Access Imaging: Comparison of Flow-interrupted Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography and Digital Subtraction Angiography1

Johannes H. M. Smits, MD, PhD, Clemens Bos, PhD, Otto E. H. Elgersma, MD, PhD, Wil A. M. A. van der Mark, RN, Peter J. Blankestijn, MD, PhD, Chris J. G. Bakker, PhD, Jan J. Zijlstra, MD, PhD, Sandra Kalmijn, MD, PhD and Willem P. T. M. Mali, MD, PhD

1 From the Department of Nephrology (J.H.M.S., W.A.M.A.v.d.M., P.J.B.), Department of Radiology, Image Sciences Institute (C.B., O.E.H.E., C.J.G.B., J.J.Z., W.P.T.M.M.), and Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care (S.K.), University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, the Netherlands. Received May 2, 2001; revision requested June 18; final revision received April 5, 2002; accepted May 8. J.H.M.S. supported by grant C.97.1643 from the Dutch Kidney Foundation. Address correspondence to C.J.G.B. (e-mail: c.j.g.bakker@azu.nl).



View larger version (75K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Contrast-enhanced MR angiographic and DSA images of AVG. A, Coronal maximum intensity projection shows an overview of the graft with both the venous (straight arrow) and arterial (curved arrow) anastomoses. B, Oblique maximum intensity projection of the contrast-enhanced MR angiographic data set and (C) conventional DSA image show a stenosis at the venous anastomosis (arrows). D, Oblique maximum intensity projection of the contrast-enhanced MR angiographic data set and (E) conventional DSA image at the arterial anastomosis (arrows) show a mild stenosis. The contrast-enhanced MR angiogram clearly delineates the narrowing of the venous limb of the graft, the puncture aneurysm at the arterial limb, and the dilated native veins downstream of the anastomosis.

 


View larger version (110K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Contrast-enhanced MR angiographic and DSA images of a Brescia-Cimino AVF. The images clearly show the native artery (straight arrows), the side-to-side anastomosis, and the stenosis (curved arrows) in the venous part of the access. A, Coronal maximum intensity projection shows an overview of the fistula. B, Oblique coronal view of the contrast-enhanced MR angiographic data with (C) corresponding conventional DSA image. D, Oblique sagittal view of the contrast-enhanced MR angiographic data with (E) corresponding conventional unsubtracted angiogram.

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3a. Bland and Altman plots of the difference between the maximum stenosis percentage obtained at MR angiography and that obtained at conventional DSA according to the mean stenosis percentage at MR angiography and DSA for (a) observer 1 and (b) observer 2. Mean difference is represented by the solid line; 95% CLs are represented by the dashed lines (mean ± 2 SDs).

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3b. Bland and Altman plots of the difference between the maximum stenosis percentage obtained at MR angiography and that obtained at conventional DSA according to the mean stenosis percentage at MR angiography and DSA for (a) observer 1 and (b) observer 2. Mean difference is represented by the solid line; 95% CLs are represented by the dashed lines (mean ± 2 SDs).

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2002 by the Radiological Society of North America.