Key result
Two-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography of the body was highly accurate, with an error rate of 0.2% (5 of 1026 examinations), and effectively replaced contrast venography.
Why the study?
Does 2D time-of-flight MR angiography accurately image the body vasculature and reduce the use of alternative imaging modalities in patients?
Observational (n=1,026)
Does 2D time-of-flight MR angiography accurately image the body vasculature and reduce the use of alternative imaging modalities in patients?
2D time-of-flight MR angiography, particularly MR venography, is highly accurate and can effectively replace contrast venography for abdominal and thoracic applications.
2D TOF MR angiography may reduce contrast venography use; leaves open definitive adoption pending randomized validation.
Time-of-flight magnetic resonance (MR) angiography has been described for numerous applications but the number of patients described in published reports is usually relatively small. There is little information concerning the general utility of MR angiography in the body, outside the cranial circulation, or its effect on use of other imaging studies. Utilization of two-dimensional (2D) time-of-flight MR angiography over a 3 year period was reviewed to determine its accuracy and impact on other imaging modalities. Cranial and cardiac studies were excluded. Correlation was made with alternative imaging and surgical findings. Between January 1990 and December 1992 2D time-of-flight MR angiography was used to examine 1026 patients. MR angiography was used most frequently to examine the venous system. There was a slight reduction in the use of alternative imaging with two exceptions. When chest MR venography was performed, alternative imaging was completely abolished. Also, contrast portal venography was virtually eliminated. Five errors (0.2% of total MR angiography examinations) were recorded. Time-of-flight MR angiography, especially MR venography, is accurate and can replace contrast venography for abdominal and thoracic applications. Cost and limited availability means that other imaging, usually ultrasound, often precedes MR angiography.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hartnell et al. (1995) conducted an observational in Patients requiring body angiography or venography (n=1,026). 2D time-of-flight MR angiography vs. Alternative imaging modalities (e.g., contrast venography, ultrasound) was evaluated on Errors in MR angiography examinations. Two-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography of the body was highly accurate, with an error rate of 0.2% (5 of 1026 examinations), and effectively replaced contrast venography.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: