Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes

To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of two non-contrast enhanced MR angiography (NCE-MRA) techniques using flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD) prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) and quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) for the calf arteries in patients with diabetes. Twenty...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2015-06, Vol.10 (6)
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Na, Zou, Liqiu, Huang, Yi, Liu, Dexiang, Tang, Yukuan, Fan, Zhaoyang, Chen, Hanwei, Liu, Xin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 6
container_start_page
container_title PloS one
container_volume 10
creator Zhang, Na
Zou, Liqiu
Huang, Yi
Liu, Dexiang
Tang, Yukuan
Fan, Zhaoyang
Chen, Hanwei
Liu, Xin
description To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of two non-contrast enhanced MR angiography (NCE-MRA) techniques using flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD) prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) and quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) for the calf arteries in patients with diabetes. Twenty six patients underwent the two NCE-MRA techniques followed by contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) of lower extremity on a 1.5T MR system. Image quality scores, arterial stenosis scores, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), vessel sharpness, and diagnostic accuracy for detecting more than 50% arterial stenosis were evaluated and statistically compared using CE-MRA as the reference standard. All examinations were performed successfully. Of the total 153 calf arterial segments obtained in the 26 patients, FSD and QISS showed no significant difference in the number of diagnostic arterial segments (151 [98%] vs. 147 [96%], respectively, P>0.05). The image quality of FSD was higher than that of QISS in the peroneal artery and posterior tibial artery (P0.05). SNR and CNR of FSD were higher than those of QISS (P0.05). The time efficiency of SNR and CNR between FSD and QISS showed no significant difference when taking into account the times for FSD-related scout scans. There was no difference in sensitivity (95% vs. 93%, P>0.05) and negative predictive value (98% vs. 97%, P>0.05) between FSD and QISS for detecting stenosis greater than 50%. However, FSD showed higher specificities (99% vs. 92%, P
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0128786
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A426181856</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A426181856</galeid><sourcerecordid>A426181856</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1356-858604be0e20b3976b76e5a58103f31e0f3abaa9a014f67e09c562aee5111a9f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE9LAzEQxYMoWKvfwEPAk4ddM5smm70IpVYtVCv1z7XMbifblDZbmhT127ugBwse5B1mePzeMDzGzkGkIHO4Wja7rcdVumk8pQIykxt9wDpQyCzRmZCHv_ZjdhLCUggljdYddv3Y-GTQ-LjFEPnQL9BXNOcPU973tWvqLW4Wn9x5_oTRkY-Bv7u44DcOS4oUTtmRxVWgs5_ZZa-3w5fBfTKe3I0G_XFSg1Q6Mcpo0StJUCZKWeS6zDUpVAaEtBJIWIklYoECelbnJIpK6QyJFABgYWWXXXzfrXFFM-dt0z5crV2oZv1epsGAUbql0j-oVnNau6otx7rW3wtc7gVaJtJHrHEXwmz0PP0_O3n7zX4BUd13cA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Zhang, Na ; Zou, Liqiu ; Huang, Yi ; Liu, Dexiang ; Tang, Yukuan ; Fan, Zhaoyang ; Chen, Hanwei ; Liu, Xin</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Na ; Zou, Liqiu ; Huang, Yi ; Liu, Dexiang ; Tang, Yukuan ; Fan, Zhaoyang ; Chen, Hanwei ; Liu, Xin</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of two non-contrast enhanced MR angiography (NCE-MRA) techniques using flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD) prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) and quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) for the calf arteries in patients with diabetes. Twenty six patients underwent the two NCE-MRA techniques followed by contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) of lower extremity on a 1.5T MR system. Image quality scores, arterial stenosis scores, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), vessel sharpness, and diagnostic accuracy for detecting more than 50% arterial stenosis were evaluated and statistically compared using CE-MRA as the reference standard. All examinations were performed successfully. Of the total 153 calf arterial segments obtained in the 26 patients, FSD and QISS showed no significant difference in the number of diagnostic arterial segments (151 [98%] vs. 147 [96%], respectively, P&gt;0.05). The image quality of FSD was higher than that of QISS in the peroneal artery and posterior tibial artery (P0.05). SNR and CNR of FSD were higher than those of QISS (P0.05). The time efficiency of SNR and CNR between FSD and QISS showed no significant difference when taking into account the times for FSD-related scout scans. There was no difference in sensitivity (95% vs. 93%, P&gt;0.05) and negative predictive value (98% vs. 97%, P&gt;0.05) between FSD and QISS for detecting stenosis greater than 50%. However, FSD showed higher specificities (99% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) and diagnostic accuracy (98% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) compared to QISS. Both FSD and QISS had similar high sensitivity and negative predictive value for detecting calf arteries with over 50% stenosis, but FSD showed slightly higher diagnostic specificity and better depiction of arterial lesions due to its isotropic submillimeter spatial resolution. QISS, being an easier to use and less time-consuming technique, could be a method of choice for rapid screening of arterial disease of the lower extremity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128786</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Angiography ; Arteries ; Care and treatment ; Comparative analysis ; Diabetics ; Identification and classification</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2015-06, Vol.10 (6)</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Public Library of Science</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,865,27928,27929</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Na</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Liqiu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Dexiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Yukuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Zhaoyang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Hanwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Xin</creatorcontrib><title>Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes</title><title>PloS one</title><description>To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of two non-contrast enhanced MR angiography (NCE-MRA) techniques using flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD) prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) and quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) for the calf arteries in patients with diabetes. Twenty six patients underwent the two NCE-MRA techniques followed by contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) of lower extremity on a 1.5T MR system. Image quality scores, arterial stenosis scores, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), vessel sharpness, and diagnostic accuracy for detecting more than 50% arterial stenosis were evaluated and statistically compared using CE-MRA as the reference standard. All examinations were performed successfully. Of the total 153 calf arterial segments obtained in the 26 patients, FSD and QISS showed no significant difference in the number of diagnostic arterial segments (151 [98%] vs. 147 [96%], respectively, P&gt;0.05). The image quality of FSD was higher than that of QISS in the peroneal artery and posterior tibial artery (P0.05). SNR and CNR of FSD were higher than those of QISS (P0.05). The time efficiency of SNR and CNR between FSD and QISS showed no significant difference when taking into account the times for FSD-related scout scans. There was no difference in sensitivity (95% vs. 93%, P&gt;0.05) and negative predictive value (98% vs. 97%, P&gt;0.05) between FSD and QISS for detecting stenosis greater than 50%. However, FSD showed higher specificities (99% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) and diagnostic accuracy (98% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) compared to QISS. Both FSD and QISS had similar high sensitivity and negative predictive value for detecting calf arteries with over 50% stenosis, but FSD showed slightly higher diagnostic specificity and better depiction of arterial lesions due to its isotropic submillimeter spatial resolution. QISS, being an easier to use and less time-consuming technique, could be a method of choice for rapid screening of arterial disease of the lower extremity.</description><subject>Angiography</subject><subject>Arteries</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Diabetics</subject><subject>Identification and classification</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE9LAzEQxYMoWKvfwEPAk4ddM5smm70IpVYtVCv1z7XMbifblDZbmhT127ugBwse5B1mePzeMDzGzkGkIHO4Wja7rcdVumk8pQIykxt9wDpQyCzRmZCHv_ZjdhLCUggljdYddv3Y-GTQ-LjFEPnQL9BXNOcPU973tWvqLW4Wn9x5_oTRkY-Bv7u44DcOS4oUTtmRxVWgs5_ZZa-3w5fBfTKe3I0G_XFSg1Q6Mcpo0StJUCZKWeS6zDUpVAaEtBJIWIklYoECelbnJIpK6QyJFABgYWWXXXzfrXFFM-dt0z5crV2oZv1epsGAUbql0j-oVnNau6otx7rW3wtc7gVaJtJHrHEXwmz0PP0_O3n7zX4BUd13cA</recordid><startdate>20150602</startdate><enddate>20150602</enddate><creator>Zhang, Na</creator><creator>Zou, Liqiu</creator><creator>Huang, Yi</creator><creator>Liu, Dexiang</creator><creator>Tang, Yukuan</creator><creator>Fan, Zhaoyang</creator><creator>Chen, Hanwei</creator><creator>Liu, Xin</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150602</creationdate><title>Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes</title><author>Zhang, Na ; Zou, Liqiu ; Huang, Yi ; Liu, Dexiang ; Tang, Yukuan ; Fan, Zhaoyang ; Chen, Hanwei ; Liu, Xin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1356-858604be0e20b3976b76e5a58103f31e0f3abaa9a014f67e09c562aee5111a9f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Angiography</topic><topic>Arteries</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Diabetics</topic><topic>Identification and classification</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Na</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Liqiu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Dexiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Yukuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Zhaoyang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Hanwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Xin</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Na</au><au>Zou, Liqiu</au><au>Huang, Yi</au><au>Liu, Dexiang</au><au>Tang, Yukuan</au><au>Fan, Zhaoyang</au><au>Chen, Hanwei</au><au>Liu, Xin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><date>2015-06-02</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>6</issue><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of two non-contrast enhanced MR angiography (NCE-MRA) techniques using flow-sensitive dephasing (FSD) prepared steady-state free precession (SSFP) and quiescent-interval single-shot (QISS) for the calf arteries in patients with diabetes. Twenty six patients underwent the two NCE-MRA techniques followed by contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) of lower extremity on a 1.5T MR system. Image quality scores, arterial stenosis scores, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), vessel sharpness, and diagnostic accuracy for detecting more than 50% arterial stenosis were evaluated and statistically compared using CE-MRA as the reference standard. All examinations were performed successfully. Of the total 153 calf arterial segments obtained in the 26 patients, FSD and QISS showed no significant difference in the number of diagnostic arterial segments (151 [98%] vs. 147 [96%], respectively, P&gt;0.05). The image quality of FSD was higher than that of QISS in the peroneal artery and posterior tibial artery (P0.05). SNR and CNR of FSD were higher than those of QISS (P0.05). The time efficiency of SNR and CNR between FSD and QISS showed no significant difference when taking into account the times for FSD-related scout scans. There was no difference in sensitivity (95% vs. 93%, P&gt;0.05) and negative predictive value (98% vs. 97%, P&gt;0.05) between FSD and QISS for detecting stenosis greater than 50%. However, FSD showed higher specificities (99% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) and diagnostic accuracy (98% vs. 92%, P&lt;0.05) compared to QISS. Both FSD and QISS had similar high sensitivity and negative predictive value for detecting calf arteries with over 50% stenosis, but FSD showed slightly higher diagnostic specificity and better depiction of arterial lesions due to its isotropic submillimeter spatial resolution. QISS, being an easier to use and less time-consuming technique, could be a method of choice for rapid screening of arterial disease of the lower extremity.</abstract><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0128786</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2015-06, Vol.10 (6)
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A426181856
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Angiography
Arteries
Care and treatment
Comparative analysis
Diabetics
Identification and classification
title Non-Contrast Enhanced MR Angiography in Patients with Diabetes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T22%3A49%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Non-Contrast%20Enhanced%20MR%20Angiography%20in%20Patients%20with%20Diabetes&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Zhang,%20Na&rft.date=2015-06-02&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=6&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0128786&rft_dat=%3Cgale%3EA426181856%3C/gale%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A426181856&rfr_iscdi=true