| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vascular and Interventional Radiology |
1 From the Program for the Assessment of Radiological Technology, Departments of Radiology (R.O., P.M.T.P., M.G.M.H.), Epidemiology and Biostatistics (R.O., T.S., M.G.M.H.), and Vascular Surgery (M.R.H.M.v.S.), Erasmus MC Rotterdam, Room Ee 21-40a, Dr Molewaterplein 50, 3015 GE Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass (M.G.M.H.); and Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Hospital and Cardiovascular Research Institute, Maastricht, the Netherlands (M.d.V., M.W.d.H., J.M.A.v.E.). Received June 30, 2004; revision requested September 3; revision received October 8; accepted November 15. Supported by grant 945-01-039 from ZonMw, Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and in part by grant 904-66-091, Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research. Address correspondence to M.G.M.H. (e-mail: m.hunink{at}erasmusmc.nl).
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate clinical utility, patient outcomes, and costs of contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography compared with multi–detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography for initial imaging in the diagnostic work-up of patients with peripheral arterial disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained. Patients referred for diagnostic imaging work-up to evaluate the feasibility of a revascularization procedure were randomly assigned to undergo either MR angiography or CT angiography. Clinical utility was assessed with therapeutic confidence (scale of 0–10) at initial imaging and with the need for additional imaging. Patient outcomes included ankle-brachial index, maximum walking distance, change in clinical status, and health-related quality of life. Actual diagnostic and therapeutic costs were calculated from the hospital perspective. Differences between group means were calculated with unpaired t tests and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: A total of 157 consecutive patients with peripheral arterial disease were prospectively randomized to undergo MR angiography (51 men, 27 women; mean age, 63 years) or CT angiography (50 men, 29 women; mean age, 64 years). For one of the 78 patients in the MR group, no data were available. Mean confidence for MR angiography (7.7) was slightly lower than that for CT angiography (8.0, P = .8). During 6 months of follow-up, 13 patients in the MR group compared with 10 patients in the CT group underwent additional vascular imaging (P = .5). Although not statistically significant, there was a consistent trend of less improvement in the MR group across all patient outcomes. The average cost for diagnostic imaging was 
359 ($438) higher in the MR group than in the CT group (95% confidence interval: 209, 511 [$255, $623]; P < .001). Therapeutic costs were higher in the MR group, but the difference was not significant.
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that CT angiography has some advantages over MR angiography in the initial evaluation of peripheral arterial disease.
© RSNA, 2005
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. Ouwendijk, M. de Vries, T. Stijnen, P. M. T. Pattynama, M. R. H. M. van Sambeek, J. Buth, A. V. Tielbeek, D. A. van der Vliet, L. J. SchutzeKool, P. J. E. H. M. Kitslaar, et al. Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of the Costs and Effects of Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease: The DIPAD Trial Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1349 - 1357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. J. White and W. A. Gray Endovascular Therapies for Peripheral Arterial Disease: An Evidence-Based Review Circulation, November 6, 2007; 116(19): 2203 - 2215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Schernthaner, D. Fleischmann, F. Lomoschitz, A. Stadler, J. Lammer, and C. Loewe Effect of MDCT Angiographic Findings on the Management of Intermittent Claudication Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1215 - 1222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. H. Heijenbrok-Kal, M. C. J. M. Kock, and M. G. M. Hunink Lower Extremity Arterial Disease: Multidetector CT Angiography Meta-Analysis Radiology, November 1, 2007; 245(2): 433 - 439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. E. Roos, D. Fleischmann, A. Koechl, T. Rakshe, M. Straka, A. Napoli, A. Kanitsar, M. Sramek, and E. Groeller Multipath Curved Planar Reformation of the Peripheral Arterial Tree in CT Angiography Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 281 - 290. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. White Intermittent Claudication N. Engl. J. Med., March 22, 2007; 356(12): 1241 - 1250. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Ouwendijk, M. C. J. M. Kock, L. C. van Dijk, M. R. H. M. van Sambeek, T. Stijnen, and M. G. M. Hunink Vessel Wall Calcifications at Multi-Detector Row CT Angiography in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease: Effect on Clinical Utility and Clinical Predictors Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 603 - 608. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Cina, R. Ouwendijk, and M. G. M. Hunink First Challenge of MR versus CT Peripheral Angiography: How to Identify a Winner? Radiology, July 1, 2006; 240(1): 302 - 304. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. L. Dolmatch Commentary Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, June 1, 2006; 18(2): 191 - 193. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
Read all eLetters
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
