This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 40/3/676    most recent STROKEAHA.108.529297v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Clifton, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Clifton, A. Related Collections Restenosis Brain Circulation and Metabolism Carotid Stenosis Cerebral Aneurysm, AVM, & Subarachnoid hemorrhage Angiography Computerized tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Angioplasty and Stenting Related Article

(Stroke. 2009;40:676.)
© 2009 American Heart Association, Inc.

Editorials

Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Angiography

A Promising Tool in the Assessment of Intracranial In-Stent Stenosis?

Andrew Clifton, MA, MRCP, FRCR

From the Department of Neuroradiology, Atkinson Morley Wing, St George’s Hospital, London, UK.

Correspondence to Andrew Clifton, MA, MRCP, FRCR, Department of Neuroradiology, 2nd Floor, Atkinson Morley Wing, St George’s Hospital, Blackshaw Road, London SW17 0QT, UK. E-mail andrew.clifton@stgeorges.nhs.uk

Key Words: intracranial stenosis • magnetic resonance angiography • stenting

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

See related article, pages 991–993.

Prabhakaran and colleagues describe a promising technique, quantitative MR angiography, as a screening tool for detecting intracranial in-stent stenosis. They looked at 14 patients with intracranial stents and compared quantitative MR angiography and conventional angiography. Using a 20% decrease in quantitative MR angiography vessel flow, they found that low blood flow measured by quantitative MR angiography at sites of intracranial stent placement was significantly associated with in-stent stenosis by catheter-based angiography. The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value are excellent, whereas the positive predictive value was fair. They identified all true cases of in-stent stenosis.¹ This article and methodology come at a good time because intracranial stents are increasingly being used for the treatment of aneurysms as well as for treating symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Other noninvasive imaging such as MR angiography and CT are usually degraded by artifact by the stents; as they state in the article, digital subtraction angiography is invasive and carries up to a 1% risk of stroke. Patients are being increasingly treated for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease.² Because this is a new technique, and restenosis is a problem as yet unquantified in sufficient numbers of patients, all patients routinely undergo follow-up angiography with, I am sure, an undoubted morbidity. Most proposed registries and trials also specify follow-up with conventional digital subtraction angiography. The ability of quantitative MR angiography to identify likely cases of restenosis shows great promise and may obviate the need for angiography in many cases. More cases . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Related Article:

The Utility of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Angiography in the Assessment of Intracranial In-Stent Stenosis

Shyam Prabhakaran, Lakshmi Warrior, Kalani R. Wells, Miral D. Jhaveri, Michael Chen, and Demetrius K. Lopes
Stroke 2009 40: 991-993. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]