title: Peripheral arterial occlusive disease: 3.0-T versus 1.5-T MR angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To prospectively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3-T versus 1.5-T contrast material-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with high spatial resolution in patients who have peripheral arterial occlusive disease, with conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) serving as the reference standard.
  
  
  METHODS
  Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained. DSA and standardized single-injection, three-station, moving-table CE MR angiography, with similar acquisition protocols and contrast agent doses at 3 T and 1.5 T, were consecutively performed in 19 patients (13 men and six women; mean age ± standard deviation, 67 years ± 9). Stenosis was scored visually in 500 arterial segments (97.5% of all available) in consensus by two radiologists in a blinded manner (the radiologists were unaware of the field strength and prior DSA and MR angiographic results and used randomized analysis order). Contrast-to-noise ratio was determined in the vascular tree of both legs. Statistical significance in stenosis scoring was evaluated by using generalized estimating equations. Contrast-to-noise differences were evaluated with paired t tests. Agreement between MR angiography and DSA was evaluated by using Fleiss-Cohen κ statistics.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both 3-T and 1.5-T CE MR angiography showed similar excellent agreement with DSA regarding stenosis classification (κ = 0.96 and 0.93, respectively). All sensitivity and specificity values exceeded 90%. Mean contrast-to-noise ratio was 3.0-4.2 times higher at 3 T than at 1.5 T.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Standardized single-injection, three-station, moving-table 3-T CE MR angiography is reliable for classification of stenosis in patients suspected of having peripheral arterial occlusive disease, and diagnostic performance was similar to that seen with 1.5-T MR angiography. There was a significantly increased contrast-to-noise ratio for identical contrast agent dose at 3-T MR angiography.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands. harrie.vd.bosch@cze.nl
authors.forename: Harrie C M
authors.initials: HC
authors.lastname: van den Bosch
authors.forename: Jos J M
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Westenberg
authors.forename: Ralph
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Caris
authors.forename: Lucien E M
authors.initials: LE
authors.lastname: Duijm
authors.forename: Alexander V
authors.initials: AV
authors.lastname: Tielbeek
authors.forename: Philip W M
authors.initials: PW
authors.lastname: Cuypers
authors.forename: Albert
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: de Roos
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D015901:Angiography, Digital Subtraction / Q000379:methods*; D001157:Arterial Occlusive Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D018810:Magnetic Resonance Angiography / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D058729:Peripheral Arterial Disease / Q000175:diagnosis*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity