Muhs Bart E, Gagne Paul, Wagener Jael, Baker Jessica, Ortega Marta Ramirez, Adelman Mark A, Cayne Neal S, Rockman Caron B, Maldonado Thomas
Division of Vascular Surgery, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2005 Nov;19(6):823-8. doi: 10.1007/s10016-005-7974-2.
Accurate patient selection based on preoperative imaging is imperative to good risk reduction in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (GE MRA) versus time-of-flight (TOF) MRA in the work-up of patients undergoing CEA. Patients undergoing CEA between 1999 and 2001 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. GE or TOF MRA was obtained on extracranial carotid arteries (n = 319) in patients undergoing CEA. Stenosis on MRA images was graded as moderate (n = 76) or severe (n = 243) by an attending radiologist who was blind to duplex results. Duplex imaging was performed in an Intersocietal Commission for the Accreditation of Vascular Labs (ICAVL) accredited lab, and stenosis was stratified as moderate (50-79%, n = 76) or high (80-99%, n = 243) grade using University of Washington criteria. For each patient, the degree of stenosis as determined by MRA (GE versus TOF) was compared to percent stenosis on duplex. For moderate-grade lesions, GE MRA concurred with duplex in 11.1% (4/36), underestimated in 2.8% (1/36), and overestimated in 86.1% (31/36) of carotid arteries imaged. TOF MRA concurred with duplex in 35% (14/40), underestimated in 0% (0/40), and overestimated in 65% (26/40) of carotid arteries. High-grade lesions demonstrated improved concordance between MRA and duplex. For these lesions, GE MRA concurred with duplex in 95.6% (130/136) of carotid arteries imaged, never overestimated stenosis (0/136), and underestimated in 4.4% (6/136). TOF MRA concurred with duplex 96.3% (103/107), overestimated stenosis as an occlusion in 0.9% (1/107), and underestimated in 2.8% (3/107). In addition to neck visualization, the GE technique allowed simultaneous aortic arch imaging. This was accomplished in 79.1% (136/172) of all GE MRAs. Simultaneous aortic arch imaging was not technically feasible with TOF MRA. For moderate-grade lesions, both MR techniques are inaccurate predictors of degree of carotid stenosis and result in a significant overestimation of stenosis. Each technique demonstrates improved concordance with duplex ultrasound in the setting of severe carotid artery stenoses. The ability of GE MRA to simultaneously image the aortic arch and the neck may allow for detection of occult tandem lesions and other anatomic variations, which may be particularly important in preoperative planning for carotid artery stenting.
基于术前影像学进行准确的患者选择对于降低接受颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)患者的风险至关重要。本研究的目的是评估钆增强磁共振血管造影(GE MRA)与时间飞跃(TOF)MRA在CEA患者检查中的准确性。从一个前瞻性维护的机构数据库中识别出1999年至2001年间接受CEA的患者。对接受CEA的患者的颅外颈动脉(n = 319)进行了GE或TOF MRA检查。一位对双功超声结果不知情的主治放射科医生将MRA图像上的狭窄程度分为中度(n = 76)或重度(n = 243)。在血管实验室认可委员会(ICAVL)认可的实验室中进行双功超声成像,并根据华盛顿大学标准将狭窄程度分为中度(50 - 79%,n = 76)或高度(80 - 99%,n = 243)。对于每位患者,将MRA(GE与TOF)确定的狭窄程度与双功超声上的狭窄百分比进行比较。对于中度病变,在成像的颈动脉中,GE MRA与双功超声一致的占11.1%(4/36),低估的占2.8%(1/36),高估的占86.1%(31/36)。TOF MRA与双功超声一致的占35%(14/40),低估的占0%(0/40),高估的占65%(26/40)。高度病变显示MRA与双功超声之间的一致性有所提高。对于这些病变,在成像的颈动脉中,GE MRA与双功超声一致的占95.6%(130/136),从未高估狭窄程度(0/136),低估的占4.4%(6/136)。TOF MRA与双功超声一致的占96.3%(103/107),将狭窄程度高估为闭塞的占0.9%(