ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2008
MR imaging: influence of imaging technique and postprocessing on measurement of internal carotid artery stenosis.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines on management of transient ischaemic attack.European stroke journal · 2021Article
- Feasibility of a sub-3-minute imaging strategy for ungated quiescent interval slice-selective MRA of the extracranial carotid arteries using radial k-space sampling and deep learning-based image processing.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2020Article
- Improved carotid lumen delineation on non-contrast MR angiography using SNAP (Simultaneous Non-Contrast Angiography and Intraplaque Hemorrhage) imaging.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2019Article
- Assessment of carotid artery atherosclerotic disease by using three-dimensional fast black-blood MR imaging: comparison with DSA.Radiology · 2015Article
- The added value of longitudinal black-blood cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography in the cross sectional identification of carotid atherosclerotic ulceration.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2009Article
- Contrast-enhanced MR angiography is not more accurate than unenhanced 2D time-of-flight MR angiography for determining > or = 70% internal carotid artery stenosis.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeMR angiography (MRA) is increasingly used as an alternative to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) to evaluate internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis. Because MRA is not standardized in data acquisition and postprocessing, we sought to evaluate the effects of different acquisition techniques (time-of-flight MRA [TOF-MRA]) and contrast-enhanced MRA [CE-MRA]) and postprocessing methods (maximum intensity projection [MIP], multiplanar reformation [MPR], and volume-rendering on stenosis grading. MATERIALS AND
methodsFifty patients (33 men, 17 women) with symptomatic ICA stenosis were examined at 1.5T. Two imaging techniques and 3 postprocessing methods resulted in 6 image datasets per patient. Two readers independently evaluated ICA stenosis according to the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial criteria. Interobserver variability was calculated with the Pearson correlation coefficient and simultaneous confidence intervals (CI). The relationship of the values of ICA stenosis between the techniques was assessed by means of simultaneous 95% Tukey CI.
resultsInterobserver agreement was high. Higher concordance was found for postprocessing techniques with TOF- than with CE-MRA; the mean difference between TOF-MPR and TOF-MIP was 0.4% (95% CI, -2.9%-3.8%). Stenosis values for CE-MPR differed significantly from those of CE volume-rendering (7.2%; 95% CI, 3.9%-10.6%).
conclusionStenosis grading was found to be independent of the postprocessing technique except for comparison of CE-MPR with CE volume-rendering, with the volume-rendering technique resulting in higher stenosis values. MPR seems to be best-suited for measurement of ICA stenosis. Parameter setting is critical with volume-rendering, in which stenosis values were consistently higher compared with the other methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.