Pedal angiography in peripheral arterial occlusive disease: first-pass i.v. contrast-enhanced MR angiography with blood pool contrast medium versus intraarterial digital subtraction angiography.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate first-pass i.v. gadofosveset-enhanced MR angiography in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease for visualization of the pedal arteries and stenosis or occlusion of those arteries with intraarterial digital subtraction angiography as the reference standard. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease (nine women, 11 men; age-range 58-83 years) were prospectively enrolled. Gadofosveset first-pass contrast-enhanced MR angiography was performed with a 1.5-T system, a dedicated foot coil, and cuff compression to the calf. Arterial segments were assessed for degree of arterial stenosis, arterial visibility, diagnostic utility, and venous contamination. Detection of vessel stenosis or occlusion was evaluated in comparison with findings at digital subtraction angiography. The unpaired Student's t test was used to test arterial visibility with the two techniques. RESULTS: First-pass MR angiography with gadofosveset had good diagnostic utility in 83.9% of all segments and no venous contamination in 96.8% of all segments. There was no difference between the performance of intraarterial digital subtraction angiography and that of i.v. contrast-enhanced MR angiography in arterial visibility overall (p = 0.245) or in subgroup analysis of surgical arterial bypass targets (p = 0.202). The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of i.v. gadofosveset-enhanced MR angiography for characterization of clinically significant stenosis and occlusion were 91.4%, 96.1%, and 93.9%. In the subgroup analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 85.5%, 96.5%, and 92.1%. CONCLUSION: Gadofosveset-enhanced MR angiography of the pedal arteries in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease has arterial visibility equal to that of digital subtraction angiography and facilitates depiction of clinically significant stenosis and occlusion.

MR-guided endovascular interventions: a comprehensive review on techniques and applications.

The magnetic resonance (MR) guidance of endovascular interventions is probably one of the greatest challenges of clinical MR research. MR angiography is not only an imaging tool for the vasculature but can also simultaneously depict high tissue contrast, including the differentiation of the vascular wall and perivascular tissues, as well as vascular function. Several hurdles had to be overcome to allow MR guidance for endovascular interventions. MR hardware and sequence design had to be developed to achieve acceptable patient access and to allow real-time or near real-time imaging. The development of interventional devices, both applicable and safe for MR imaging (MRI), was also mandatory. The subject of this review is to summarize the latest developments in real-time MRI hardware, MRI, visualization tools, interventional devices, endovascular tracking techniques, actual applications and safety issues.

Intraarterial contrast-enhanced MR aortography with and without parallel acquisition technique in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease.

OBJECTIVE: Repeated intraarterial gadolinium injections are necessary in endovascular MRI-guided interventions; therefore a low-dose protocol with a short acquisition time is preferable. The purpose of this study was to conduct a quantitative comparison of intraarterial MR aortograms obtained with and without high-speed parallel acquisition technique. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Intraarterial MR aortography was performed at 1.5 T on nine patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease and in an aortic phantom with pulsatile flow. A 3D fast low-angle shot MRI sequence was used for standard technique (acquisition time, 20 seconds) and for parallel acquisition technique (acquisition time, 14 seconds). In all patients, a pigtail catheter was left in the suprarenal position after digital subtraction angiography. Contrast-enhanced intraarterial MR aortography was performed after automated injection of 50 mmol/L gadoterate dimeglumine at an injection rate of 4 mL/s. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and image quality were evaluated in both imaging series at different locations. In an aortic phantom with pulsatile flow, CNR was determined 1, 30, and 60 cm distal to the catheter tip with standard and parallel acquisition techniques. RESULTS: In all patients, intraarterial MR aortography was feasible with both acquisition techniques. No significant difference in CNR or image quality was observed in the patient study. Similar results were calculated for the pulsatile aortic flow phantom at all locations. CONCLUSION: Intraarterial MR aortography is feasible with parallel acquisition technique without a significant loss of CNR. This technique reduces contrast agent consumption approximately 30% owing to an approximately 30% reduction in acquisition time.