COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

An international multicenter comparison of time-SLIP unenhanced MR angiography and contrast-enhanced CT angiography for assessing renal artery stenosis: the renal artery contrast-free trial.

OBJECTIVE: The unenhanced MR angiography (MRA) technique time-spatial labeling inversion pulse (time-SLIP) may provide a safe alternative for evaluating the renal arteries for stenosis. This international multicenter trial tested the hypothesis that time-SLIP unenhanced MRA is accurate and robust for assessing the renal arteries for stenosis in comparison with contrast-enhanced CT angiography (CTA).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Four centers (United States, Europe, Asia) enrolled 75 patients (average age ± SD, 58 ± 13 years; 41 [55%] men and 34 [45%] women). Each patient underwent abdominal contrast-enhanced CTA and abdominal unenhanced MRA using time-SLIP with balanced steady-state free precession. All images were visually assessed for quality (arterial signal intensity) and for the absence or presence of renal artery stenosis (≤ 50% or > 50% stenosis, respectively). In addition, for arteries with any visible disease, the severity of the stenosis was quantified. Two blinded readers evaluated each study. No arteries were excluded from analysis.

RESULTS: Unenhanced MRA image quality was excellent for 56 of 75 patients (75%) and good for 16 of 75 patients (21%). CTA was used as the reference standard and showed that 23 of 161 renal arteries (14.3%) had stenosis > 50%. Unenhanced MRA correctly classified 17 of the 23 renal arteries with > 50% stenosis and correctly classified 128 of the 138 renal arteries as not having disease (≤ 50% stenosis) to yield a sensitivity of 74%, specificity of 93%, and accuracy of 90% (χ(2) = 0.56; p = 0.45, no statistically significant difference). Of the 16 misclassified arteries, only three had a clinically relevant misclassification (CTA ≥ 70% stenosis and unenhanced MRA ≤ 50% stenosis or unenhanced MRA ≥ 70% stenosis and CTA ≤ 50% stenosis). On average, measured stenotic severity (n = 28 arteries) was similar for unenhanced MRA (64% ± 17%) and CTA (62% ± 16%) (p = 0.51).

CONCLUSION: Compared with contrast-enhanced CTA, the unenhanced MRA technique time-SLIP shows promise for assessing the renal arteries for stenosis. The unenhanced MRA technique time-SLIP may provide a safe alternative for evaluating the renal arteries for stenosis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app