Cargando…

Comparing different MR angiography strategies of carotid stents in a vascular flow model: toward stent-specific recommendations in MR follow-up

INTRODUCTION: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) requires adequate follow-up imaging to assess complications such as in-stent stenosis or occlusion. Options include digital subtraction angiography, CT angiography, ultrasound, and MR angiography (MRA), which may offer a non-invasive option for CAS follow-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frölich, Andreas M. J., Pilgram-Pastor, Sara M., Psychogios, Marios N., Mohr, Alexander, Knauth, Michael
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3077747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20721544
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-010-0753-y
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) requires adequate follow-up imaging to assess complications such as in-stent stenosis or occlusion. Options include digital subtraction angiography, CT angiography, ultrasound, and MR angiography (MRA), which may offer a non-invasive option for CAS follow-up imaging. The aim of this study was to assess contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) and three-dimensional time-of-flight MRA (3D-TOF) for visualization of the in-stent lumen in different carotid stents. METHODS: In this study, we compared CE-MRA and 3D-TOF of five different carotid stents (Guidant Acculink®, Cordis Precise®, Boston Wallstent®, Abbot Vascular Xact®, Cook Zilver®) in three diameters (4, 6, and 8 mm) using a vascular flow model at 3.0 T with the help of a recently developed carotid surface coil. Stent-related artifacts were objectively assessed by calculating artificial lumen narrowing (ALN) and relative in-stent signal (RIS). RESULTS: RIS and ALN depended heavily on stent type, stent diameter, and the employed MR sequence. ALN and RIS were relatively favorable for Acculink®, Precise®, and Zilver® stents with both CE-MRA and 3D-TOF. CE-MRA provided better results for the Wallstent, while the Xact stent was difficult to visualize with both MRA protocols. CONCLUSION: Both CE-MRA and 3D-TOF are viable options for depicting the in-stent lumen in carotid stents. For specific stents, 3D-TOF provided image quality comparable to CE-MRA and may thus be suitable for in vivo assessment. Development of stent-specific pathways for follow-up imaging seems advisable to address stent-related differences in image quality.