Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Original research
Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated by flow diverter: comparison of three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography (3D-TOF-MRA) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) sequences with digital subtraction angiography as the gold standard
  1. Jonathan Attali1,
  2. Azzedine Benaissa1,
  3. Sébastien Soize1,
  4. Krzysztof Kadziolka1,
  5. Christophe Portefaix2,
  6. Laurent Pierot1
  1. 1Department of radiology, Hôpital Maison Blanche, Université de Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France
  2. 2CReSTIC SIC EA3804, Université de Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France
  1. Correspondence to Professor Laurent Pierot, Department of Radiology, Maison Blanche Hospital, 45 Rue Cognacq-Jay, Reims 51092, France; lpierot{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Background and purpose Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated by flow diverter with MRI is complicated by imaging artifacts produced by these devices. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography (3D-TOF-MRA) and contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) at 3 T for the evaluation of aneurysm occlusion and parent artery patency after flow diversion treatment, with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the gold standard.

Materials and methods Patients treated with flow diverters between January 2009 and January 2013 followed by MRA at 3 T (3D-TOF-MRA and CE-MRA) and DSA within a 48 h period were included in a prospective single-center study. Aneurysm occlusion was assessed with full and simplified Montreal scales and parent artery patency with three-grade and two-grade scales.

Results Twenty-two patients harboring 23 treated aneurysms were included. Interobserver agreement using simplified scales for occlusion (Montreal) and parent artery patency were higher for DSA (0.88 and 0.61) and CE-MRA (0.74 and 0.55) than for 3D-TOF-MRA (0.51 and 0.02). Intermodality agreement was higher for CE-MRA (0.88 and 0.32) than for 3D-TOF-MRA (0.59 and 0.11). CE-MRA yielded better accuracy than 3D-TOF-MRA for aneurysm remnant detection (sensitivity 83% vs 50%; specificity 100% vs 100%) and for the status of the parent artery (specificity 63% vs 32%; sensitivity 100% vs 100%).

Conclusions At 3 T, CE-MRA is superior to 3D-TOF-MRA for the evaluation of aneurysm occlusion and parent artery patency after flow diversion treatment. However, intraluminal evaluation remains difficult with MRA regardless of the sequence used.

  • Aneurysm
  • Flow Diverter
  • Magnetic Resonance Angiography

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.