首页> 外文期刊>Radiology >Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis: Accuracy of Subjective Visual Impression for Evaluation with Digital Subtraction Angiography and Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography.
【24h】

Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis: Accuracy of Subjective Visual Impression for Evaluation with Digital Subtraction Angiography and Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography.

机译:颈内动脉狭窄:用数字减影血管造影和对比增强MR血管造影评估主观视觉印象的准确性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To prospectively determine, for both digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, the accuracy of subjective visual impression (SVI) in the evaluation of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis, with objective caliper measurements serving as the reference standard. Materials and Methods: Local ethics committee approval and written informed patient consent were obtained. A total of 142 symptomatic patients (41 women, 101 men; mean age, 70 years; age range, 44-89 years) suspected of having ICA stenosis on the basis of Doppler ultrasonographic findings underwent both DSA and contrast-enhanced MR angiography. With each modality, three independent neuroradiologists who were blinded to other test results first visually estimated and subsequently objectively measured stenoses. Diagnostic accuracy and percentage misclassification for correct categorization of 70%-99% stenosis were calculated for SVI, with objective measurements serving as thereference standard. Interobserver variability was determined with kappa statistics. Results: After exclusion of arteries that were unsuitable for measurement, 180 vessels remained for analysis with DSA and 159 vessels remained for analysis with contrast-enhanced MR angiography. With respect to 70%-99% stenosis, SVI was associated with average misclassification of 8.9% for DSA (8.9%, 7.8%, and 10.0% for readers A, B, and C, respectively) and of 11.7% for contrast-enhanced MR angiography (11.3%, 8.8%, and 15.1% for readers A, B, and C, respectively). Negative predictive values were excellent (92.3%-100%). Interobserver variability was higher for SVI (DSA, kappa = 0.62-0.71; contrast-enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.57-0.69) than for objective measurements (DSA, kappa = 0.75-0.80; contrast-enhanced MR angiography, kappa = 0.66-0.72). Conclusion: SVI alone is not recommended for evaluation of ICA stenosis with both DSA and contrast-enhanced MR angiography. SVI may be acceptable as an initial screening tool to exclude the presence of 70%-99% stenosis, but caliper measurements are warranted to confirm the presence of such stenosis. (c) RSNA, 2007.
机译:目的:前瞻性地确定数字减影血管造影(DSA)和造影剂增强磁共振(MR)血管造影的主观视觉印象(SVI)在颈内动脉(ICA)狭窄评估中的客观准确性测量值作为参考标准。材料和方法:获得地方伦理委员会的批准和患者知情的书面同意。根据多普勒超声检查结果,怀疑有ICA狭窄的142例有症状的患者(41名女性,101名男性;平均年龄为70岁;年龄范围为44-89岁)接受了DSA和MR造影对比检查。对于每种方式,三名独立的神经放射科医生对其他测试结果视而不见,他们首先进行视觉估计,然后客观地测量狭窄。计算SVI正确分类为70%-99%狭窄的诊断准确性和误分类百分比,以客观测量作为参考标准。观察者间的变异性由κ统计决定。结果:排除了不适合测量的动脉后,剩下的180根血管需要进行DSA分析,剩下的159根血管需要进行造影剂增强MR血管造影分析。对于70%-99%的狭窄,SVI与DSA的平均错误分类为8.9%(阅读器A,B和C的平均错误分类分别为8.9%,7.8%和10.0%)和对比度增强的平均错误分类为11.7% MR血管造影(阅读器A,B和C分别为11.3%,8.8%和15.1%)。阴性预测值极好(92.3%-100%)。 SVI(DSA,kappa = 0.62-0.71;对比增强MR血管造影,kappa = 0.57-0.69)的观察者间差异高于客观测量(DSA,kappa = 0.75-0.80;对比增强MR血管造影,kappa = 0.66-) 0.72)。结论:不建议单独使用SVI来通过DSA和对比增强MR血管造影来评估ICA狭窄。 SVI作为排除70%-99%狭窄的存在的初始筛选工具可能是可以接受的,但是必须通过卡尺测量来确认这种狭窄的存在。 (c)RSNA,2007年。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号