Accuracy of non-contrast quiescent-interval single-shot and quiescent-interval single-shot arterial spin-labelled magnetic resonance angiography in assessment of peripheral arterial disease in a diabetic population
AuthorLam, A; Perchyonok, Y; Ranatunga, D; Lukies, MW; Richmond, D; Hornsey, EK; McColl, B; Heidrich, J; Ko, P-H; Spelman, T; ...
Source TitleJOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY
University of Melbourne Author/sChuen, Jason; Lim, Ruth; Perchyonok, Yuliya; Spelman, Timothy; Lam, Adrienne
Document TypeJournal Article
CitationsLam, A., Perchyonok, Y., Ranatunga, D., Lukies, M. W., Richmond, D., Hornsey, E. K., McColl, B., Heidrich, J., Ko, P. -H., Spelman, T., Chuen, J., Edelman, R. R. & Lim, R. P. (2020). Accuracy of non-contrast quiescent-interval single-shot and quiescent-interval single-shot arterial spin-labelled magnetic resonance angiography in assessment of peripheral arterial disease in a diabetic population. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 64 (1), pp.35-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12987.
Access StatusAccess this item via the Open Access location
Open Access URLhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1754-9485.12987
INTRODUCTION: Diabetic patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are challenging to assess. Non-contrast magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) offers a safe alternative in patients with renal impairment. The study objective is to evaluate accuracy of lower limb quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) MRA and pedal QISS-arterial spin-labelled (ASL) MRA for detection of significant stenosis in diabetic patients with PAD. METHODS: Combined QISS and QISS-ASL MRA was performed in 32 diabetic PAD patients (20 male, 12 female; mean 69 years; 8 with critical ischaemia). Two readers assessed haemodynamically significant (>50%) stenosis and diagnostic confidence on MRA, against digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard, with subgroup analysis of patients with severe renal impairment (n = 7). Inter-reader agreement of stenosis and diagnostic confidence were evaluated. Test-retest reproducibility was evaluated in 10 subjects who underwent repeat MRA on a different day. RESULTS: At DSA, 262/645 segments (40.6%) had haemodynamically significant stenoses. MRA accuracy was 78.1% (478/612) and 75.6% (464/614), sensitivity 64.7% (161/249) and 77.5% (193/249), and specificity 87.3% (317/363) and 74.2% (271/365) for 2 readers. MRA accuracy was 80.9% and 80.7% for readers 1 and 2, respectively, in patients with severe renal impairment. QISS MRA but not pedal QISS-ASL MRA was considered of diagnostic image quality. Inter-reader agreement was moderate for stenosis (ĸ = 0.60) and diagnostic confidence (ĸ = 0.41). Test-retest reproducibility was high (ĸ = 0.87) and moderate (ĸ = 0.54) for individual readers. CONCLUSIONS: Quiescent-interval single-shot MRA has reasonable accuracy in a diabetic PAD population with high burden of disease, providing a non-contrast option in patients with renal impairment. QISS-ASL MRA requires further optimisation to be clinically feasible.
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References