[1]张鹤,李明华,方淳,等.3.0T时间飞跃法MRA诊断颅内动脉瘤—与DSA对照[J].介入放射学杂志,2008,(09):618.
 ZHANG He,LI Minghua,FANG Chun,et al.Detection of intracranial aneurysm with time-of-flight MRA at 3.0Tesla:comparison with digital subtraction angiography[J].journal interventional radiology,2008,(09):618.
点击复制

3.0T时间飞跃法MRA诊断颅内动脉瘤—与DSA对照()

PDF下载中关闭

分享到:

《介入放射学杂志》[ISSN:1008-794X/CN:31-1796/R]

卷:
期数:
2008年09期
页码:
618
栏目:
神经介入
出版日期:
2008-09-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Detection of intracranial aneurysm with time-of-flight MRA at 3.0Tesla:comparison with digital subtraction angiography
作者:
张鹤李明华方淳
200233上海交通大学附属第六人民医院介入影像科
Author(s):
ZHANG He LI Ming-huaFANG ChunLI Wen-binWU Chun-genCHENG Ying-sheng.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology,the Sixth Affiliated People's Hospital,Shanghai Jiaotong University,Shanghai200233,China
关键词:
磁共振脑血管成像高场强颅内动脉瘤数字血管造影
分类号:
R743
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的评价3.0T时间飞跃法磁共振血管成像(3.0T TOF MRA)对颅内动脉瘤的诊断价值。方法对34例临床提示颅内动脉瘤患者前瞻性行3.0T TOF MRA及脑血管DSA检查。所有图像由3名医师分成2组在工作站上进行读片。第1组由2名高年资神经影像组医师分别独立阅读重建的最大密度投影(MIP)图像;第2组由1名高年资神经影像组医师同时阅读MIP和原始数据图像(source image)。以DSA诊断结果作为标准,评价3.0T TOF MRA诊断颅内动脉瘤的灵敏度、特异度及正确率。结果DSA共检测20枚动脉瘤(19例),其中颈内动脉7例,前交通动脉5例,后交通动脉5例,大脑前、中动脉各1例。TOF MRA总体诊断灵敏度、特异度、正确率分别为94.8%、89.4%和91.4%。第2组的诊断有效性最高,两组间诊断阳性率差异无统计学意义(χ 2 =0.242,P>0.05和χ 2 =0.172,P>0.05)。结论3.0T TOF MRA作为一种快速、无创的影像检查方法,能够很好显示颅内动脉瘤。MIP结合Source图像可提高3.0T TOF MRA诊断的准确性。

参考文献/References:

[1]Fogelholm R,Hernesniemi J,Vapalahti M.Impact of early surgery on outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage:a population-based study[J].Stroke,1993,24:1649-1654.
[2]Campeau NG,Huston III J,Bernstein MA,et al.Magnetic resonance angiography at3.0tesla:initial clinical experience[J].Top Magn Reson Imaging,2001,12:183-204.
[3]Stock KW,Wetzel S,Kirsch E,et al.Anatomic evaluation of the circle of Willis:MR angiography versus intraarterial digital subtraction angiography[J].AJNR,1996,17:1495-1499.
[4]Al-Kwifi O,Emery DJ ,Wilman AH.Vessel contrast at three tesla in time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography of the intracranial and carotid arteries[J].Magn Reson Imaging,2002,20:181-187.
[5]Gibbs GF,Huston III J,Bernstein MA,et al.Improved image quality of intracranial aneurysm:3.0-T versus1.5-T time-of-flight MR angiography[J].AJNR,2004,25:84-87.
[6]Bouthillier A,van Loveren HR,Keller JT.Segments of the internal carotid artery:a new classification[J].Neurosurgery,1996,38:425-433.
[7]Nael K,Michaely JH,Villablanca P,et al.Time-resolved contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the head and neck at3.0Tesla:initial results[J].Invest Radiol,2006,41:116-124.
[8]Choi CG,Lee DH,Lee JH,et al.Detection of intracranial atherosclerotic steno-occlusive disease with3D Time-of-Flight magnetic resonance angiography with sensitivity encoding at3T[J].AJNR,2007,28:439-446.
[9]Lin C,Bernstein M,Huston J,et al.Measurements of T1re-laxation times at3.0T:implications for clinical MRA.In:Book of Abstracts[M]:9th Annual Meeting of the Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine,Vol.2.Berkeley,CA:ISMRM,2001:1391-1395.
[10]Willinek WA,Born M,Simon B,et al.Time-of-flight MR angio-graphy:comparison of3.0-T imaging and1.5-T imaging—initial experience[J].Radiology,2003,229:913-920.
[11]White PM,Wardlaw JM,Easton V.Can noninvasive imaging accurately depict intracranial aneurysms ?A systematic review[J].Radiology,2000,217:361-370.
[12]Schuierer G,Huk WJ ,Laub G.Magnetic resonance angiography of intracranial aneurysms :comparison with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography[J].Neuroradiology,1992,35:50-54.
[13]Deutschmann HA,Augustin M,Simbrunner J,et al.Diagnostic accuracy of3D Time-of-Flight MR Angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography for follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms :influence of aneurysm size[J].AJNR,2007,28:628-634.
[14]Cottier JP,Bleuzen-Couthon A,Gallas S,et al.Intracranial aneurysms treated with Guglielmi detachable coils:is contrast material necessary in the follow-up with3D Time-of-Flight MR angiography[J]?AJNR,2003,24:1797-1803.
[15]Yamada N,Hayashi K,Murao K,et al.Time-of-flight MR angiography targeted to coiled intracranial aneurysms is more sensitive to residual flow than is digital subtraction angiography[J].AJNR,2004,25:1154-1157.
[16]Urbach H,Dorenbeck U,von Falkenhausen M,et al.Three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography at3T compared to digital subtraction angiography in the follow-up of ruptured and coiled intracranial aneurysms :a prospective study[J].Neuroradiology,2008,23:350-355.
[17]Yoneoka Y,Watanabe M,Nishino K,et al.Evaluation of post-procedure changes in aneurysmal lumen following detachable coil-placement using multi-planar reconstruction of high-field(3.0T)magnetic resonance angiography[J].Acta Neurochir(Wien),2008,150:351-358.
[18]Majoie CB,Sprengers ME,van Rooij WJ ,et al.MR angio-graphy at3T versus digital subtraction angiography in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with detachable coils[J].AJNR,2005,26:1349-1356.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2008-03-26
更新日期/Last Update: 2008-09-15