Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12748115›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2003

Prospective evaluation of carotid artery stenosis: elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography and spiral CT angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography.

Juan Alvarez-Linera, Julián Benito-León, José Escribano, Jorge Campollo, Ricardo Gesto

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. The role of CE-MRA of the supraortic vessels in the detection of associated intracranial pathology.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Acute ischemic stroke imaging: a practical approach for diagnosis and triage.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2016
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juan Alvarez-LineraDepartment of Neuroradiology, Rúber International Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Julián Benito-León
José Escribano
Jorge Campollo
Ricardo Gesto
Hospital Ruber Internacional · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeAlthough digital subtraction angiography (DSA) is the reference standard for assessing carotid arteries, it is uncomfortable for patients and has a small risk of disabling stroke and death. These problems have fueled the use of spiral CT angiography and MR angiography. We prospectively compared elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography and spiral CT angiography with conventional DSA for detecting carotid artery stenosis.

methodsEighty carotid arteries (in 40 symptomatic patients) were assessed. Elliptic centric MR and spiral CT angiographic data were reconstructed with maximum intensity projection and multiplanar reconstruction techniques. All patients had been referred for DSA evaluation on the basis of findings at Doppler sonography, which served as a screening method (degree of stenosis > or = 70% or inconclusive results). Degree of carotid stenosis estimated by using the three modalities was compared.

resultsSignificant correlation with DSA was found for stenosis degree for both elliptic centric MR and spiral CT angiography; however, the correlation coefficient was higher for MR than for CT angiography (r = 0.98 vs r = 0.86). Underestimation of stenoses of 70-99% occurred in one case with elliptic centric MR angiography (a 70% stenosis was underestimated as 65%) and in nine cases with spiral CT angiography, in comparison to DSA findings. Overestimation occurred in two cases with MR angiography (stenoses of 65-67% were overestimated as 70-75%). With CT, overestimation occurred in seven cases; a stenosis of 60% in one case was overestimated as 70%. Both techniques confirmed the three cases of carotid occlusion. With elliptic centric MR angiography, carotid stenoses of 70% or greater were detected with high sensitivity, 97.1%; specificity, 95.2%; likelihood ratio (LR) for a positive test result, 20.4; and ratio of LR(+) to LR(-), -0.3. With spiral CT angiography, sensitivity, specificity, LR(+), and LR(+):LR(-) were 74.3%, 97.6%, 31.2, and 0.3, respectively.

conclusionElliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography is more accurate than spiral CT angiography to adequately evaluate carotid stenosis. Furthermore, elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography appears to be adequate to replace conventional DSA in most patients examined.

Indexed as

Angiography, Digital SubtractionContrast MediaMagnetic Resonance AngiographyTomography, Spiral ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarotid ArteriesCarotid Artery, InternalCarotid StenosisFemaleGadolinium DTPAHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedIohexolLikelihood FunctionsContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAIohexoliopromide

Identifiers

PMID12748115
PMCPMC7975781
OpenAlexW1912938765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.