Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Both computed tomography (CT) angiography (CTA) and contrast‐enhanced MR angiography (CEMRA) have proven to be useful and accurate cross‐sectional imaging modalities over a wide range of vascular territories and vascular disorders. A key advantage of MRA is that, unlike CTA, it can be performed without the administration of a contrast agent. In this review article we consider the motivations for using noncontrast MRA, potential contrast mechanisms, imaging techniques, advantages, and drawbacks with respect to CTA and CEMRA, and the level of evidence for using the various MRA techniques. In addition, we explore new developments that promise to expand the reliability and range of clinical applications for noncontrast MRA, along with functional MRA capabilities not available with CTA or CEMRA. Level of Evidence : 1 Technical Efficacy : Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:355–373.
Edelman et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: