High-Resolution 3T MR Angiography of the Carotid Arteries: Comparison of Manual and Semiautomated Quantification of Stenosis

References

1. ↵
   Rothwell PM. For severe carotid stenosis found on ultrasound, further arterial evaluation prior to carotid endarterectomy is unnecessary: the argument against. Stroke 2003;34:1817–19, discussion 1819

   FREE Full Text
2. Wardlaw JM, Chappell FM, Best JJ, et al. Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2006;367:1503–12

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. ↵
   Cuffe RL, Rothwell PM. Effect of nonoptimal imaging on the relationship between the measured degree of symptomatic carotid stenosis and risk of ischemic stroke. Stroke 2006;37:1785–91

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. ↵
   Griswold MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, et al. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med 2002;47:1202–10

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. ↵
   Fox AJ, Eliasziw M, Rothwell PM, et al. Identification, prognosis, and management of patients with carotid artery near occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:2086–94

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. ↵
   Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–10

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. ↵
   Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. ↵
   Willinsky RA, Taylor SM, TerBrugge K, et al. Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography: prospective analysis of 2,899 procedures and review of the literature. Radiology 2003;227:522–28

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. ↵
   Nederkoorn PJ, van der Graaf Y, Hunink MG. Duplex ultrasound and magnetic resonance angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography in carotid artery stenosis: a systematic review. Stroke 2003;34:1324–32

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. ↵
    Bartlett ES, Walters TD, Symons SP, et al. Quantification of carotid stenosis on CT angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:13–19

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. Hacklander T, Wegner H, Hoppe S, et al. Agreement of multislice CT angiography and MR angiography in assessing the degree of carotid artery stenosis in consideration of different methods of postprocessing. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:433–42

    CrossRefPubMed
12. ↵
    Lell M, Fellner C, Baum U, et al. Evaluation of carotid artery stenosis with multisection CT and MR imaging: influence of imaging modality and postprocessing. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:104–10

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. ↵
    Yang CW, Carr JC, Futterer SF, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the carotid and vertebrobasilar circulations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:2095–101

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. ↵
    Nael K, Villablanca JP, Pope WB, et al. Supraaortic arteries: contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 3.0 T—highly accelerated parallel acquisition for improved spatial resolution over an extended field of view. Radiology 2007;242:600–09

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. ↵
    Al-Kwifi O, Emery DJ, Wilman AH. Vessel contrast at three Tesla in time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography of the intracranial and carotid arteries. Magn Reson Imaging 2002;20:181–87

    CrossRefPubMed
16. Bachmann R, Nassenstein I, Kooijman H, et al. Spontaneous acute dissection of the internal carotid artery: high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 tesla with a dedicated surface coil. Invest Radiol 2006;41:105–11

    CrossRefPubMed
17. Cashen TA, Carr JC, Shin W, et al. Intracranial time-resolved contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 3T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:822–29

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. Fenchel M, Nael K, Ruehm S, et al. Isotropic high spatial resolution magnetic resonance angiography of the supra-aortic arteries using two-dimensional parallel imaging (iPAT2) at 3 Tesla: a feasibility study. Invest Radiol 2006;41:545–52

    CrossRefPubMed
19. Hahnel S, Nguyen-Trong TH, Rohde S, et al. 3.0 Tesla contrast-enhanced MR angiography of carotid artery stents: in vitro measurements as compared with 1.5 Tesla. J Neuroradiol 2006;33:75–80

    CrossRefPubMed
20. Nael K, Michaely HJ, Villablanca P, et al. Time-resolved contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the head and neck at 3.0 tesla: initial results. Invest Radiol 2006;41:116–24

    CrossRefPubMed
21. Nael K, Ruehm SG, Michaely HJ, et al. High spatial-resolution CE-MRA of the carotid circulation with parallel imaging: comparison of image quality between 2 different acceleration factors at 3.0 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2006;41:391–99

    CrossRefPubMed
22. Ziyeh S, Strecker R, Berlis A, et al. Dynamic 3D MR angiography of intra- and extracranial vascular malformations at 3T: a technical note. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:630–34

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. Gibbs GF, Huston J 3rd, Bernstein MA, et al. Improved image quality of intracranial aneurysms: 3.0-T versus 1.5-T time-of-flight MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:84–87

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. ↵
    Gibbs GF, Huston J 3rd, Bernstein MA, et al. 3.0-Tesla MR angiography of intracranial aneurysms: comparison of time-of-flight and contrast-enhanced techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:97–102

    CrossRefPubMed
25. ↵
    Adame IM, de Koning PJ, Lelieveldt BP, et al. An integrated automated analysis method for quantifying vessel stenosis and plaque burden from carotid MRI images: combined postprocessing of MRA and vessel wall MR. Stroke 2006;37:2162–4. Epub 2006 Jun 29

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. de Koning PJ, Schaap JA, Janssen JP, et al. Automated segmentation and analysis of vascular structures in magnetic resonance angiographic images. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:1189–98

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. Frangi AF, Niessen WJ, Nederkoorn PJ, et al. Quantitative analysis of vascular morphology from 3D MR angiograms: in vitro and in vivo results. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:311–22

    CrossRefPubMed
28. van Bemmel CM, Viergever MA, Niessen WJ. Semiautomatic segmentation and stenosis quantification of 3D contrast-enhanced MR angiograms of the internal carotid artery. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:753–60

    CrossRefPubMed
29. Boskamp T, Rinck D, Link F, et al. New vessel analysis tool for morphometric quantification and visualization of vessels in CT and MR imaging data sets. Radiographics 2004;24:287–97

    PubMed
30. Suri JS, Liu K, Reden L, et al. A review on MR vascular image processing: skeleton versus nonskeleton approach. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2002;6(pt 2):338–50
31. ↵
    Suri JS, Liu K, Reden L, et al. A review on MR vascular image processing algorithms: acquisition and prefiltering. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2002;6(pt 1):324–37
32. ↵
    Zhang Z, Berg MH, Ikonen AE, et al. Carotid artery stenosis: reproducibility of automated 3D CT angiography analysis method. Eur Radiol 2004;14:665–72

    CrossRefPubMed
33. ↵
    Silvennoinen HM, Ikonen S, Soinne L, et al. CT angiographic analysis of carotid artery stenosis: comparison of manual assessment, semiautomatic vessel analysis, and digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:97–103

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. ↵
    Hirai T, Korogi Y, Ono K, et al. Maximum stenosis of extracranial internal carotid artery: effect of luminal morphology on stenosis measurement by using CT angiography and conventional DSA. Radiology 2001;221:802–09

    PubMedWeb of Science