Radiologie up2date, Table of Contents Radiologie up2date 2018; 18(02): 155-168DOI: 10.1055/a-0578-5309 Pulmonale und kardiovaskuläre Radiologie Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York Periphere MR-Angiografie Peripheral MRA Harald Kramer , Karl-Friedrich Kreitner Recommend Article Abstract Buy Article All articles of this category Zusammenfassung In der Diagnostik der peripheren AVK gilt die digitale Subtraktionsangiografie (DSA) immer noch als Referenzstandard. Alternativ stehen Sonografie, CTA und MRA zur Verfügung. Die im Folgenden vorgestellte MRA bietet ein breites Portfolio an verschiedenen Techniken und kommt damit für verschiedene Anwendungsmöglichkeiten infrage. Schlüsselwörter SchlüsselwörterMR-Angiografie Key words Key wordsMR-Angiography Full Text References Literatur 1 Heron M. Deaths: Leading Causes for 2014. National vital statistics reports: from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System 2016; 65: 1-96 2 Norgren L, Hiatt WR, Dormandy JA. et al. TASC II Working Group. Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). J Vasc Surg 2007; 45 (Suppl S) S5-S67 3 Dormandy J, Heeck L, Vig S. Acute limb ischemia. Semin Vasc Surg 1999; 12: 148-153 4 Diehm C, Kareem S, Lawall H. Epidemiology of peripheral arterial disease. Vasa 2004; 33: 183-189 5 Kanda T, Nakai Y, Oba H. et al. Gadolinium deposition in the brain. Magn Reson Imaging 2016; 34: 1346-1350 6 Radbruch A. Are some agents less likely to deposit gadolinium in the brain?. Magn Reson Imaging 2016; 34: 1351-1354 7 Ramalho J, Ramalho M. Gadolinium Deposition and Chronic Toxicity. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2017; 25: 765-778 8 Robert P, Lehericy S, Grand S. et al. T1-Weighted Hypersignal in the Deep Cerebellar Nuclei After Repeated Administrations of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents in Healthy Rats: Difference Between Linear and Macrocyclic Agents. Invest Radiol 2015; 50: 473-480 9 Cowper SE. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a review and exploration of the role of gadolinium. Adv Dermatol 2007; 23: 131-154 10 Thomsen HS. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: A serious late adverse reaction to gadodiamide. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 2619-2621 11 Green D, Parker D. CTA and MRA: visualization without catheterization. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2003; 24: 185-191 12 Pintaske J, Martirosian P, Graf H. et al. Relaxivity of Gadopentetate Dimeglumine (Magnevist), Gadobutrol (Gadovist), and Gadobenate Dimeglumine (MultiHance) in human blood plasma at 0.2, 1.5, and 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2006; 41: 213-221 13 Rohrer M. MRI Contrast Media – Introduction and basic Properties of the Blood Pool Agent Vasovist. In: Leiner TG, Rohrer M, Schienberg SO. eds. Clinical Blood Pool MR Imaging. Berlin: Springer; 2008: 3-15 14 Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J. et al. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol 2005; 40: 715-724 15 Goyen M, Herborn CU, Vogt FM. et al. Using a 1 M Gd-chelate (gadobutrol) for total-body three-dimensional MR angiography: preliminary experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17: 565-571 16 Goyen M, Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU. et al. 0.5 M Gd chelate (Magnevist) versus 1.0 M Gd chelate (Gadovist): dose-independent effect on image quality of pelvic three-dimensional MR-angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14: 602-607 17 Gregor M, Tombach B, Hentsch A. et al. Peripheral run-off CE-MRA with a 1.0 molar gadolinium chelate (Gadovist) with intraarterial DSA comparison. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 (Suppl. 02) S398-S400 18 Kramer H, Michaely HJ, Requardt M. et al. Effects of injection rate and dose on image quality in time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) by using 1.0M contrast agents. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 1394-1402 19 Marchal G, Michiels J, Bosmans H. et al. Contrast-enhanced MRA of the brain. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992; 16: 25-29 20 Bongartz GM, Boos M, Winter K. et al. Clinical utility of contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Eur Radiol 1997; 7 (Suppl. 05) 178-186 21 Westenberg JJ, Wasser MN, van der Geest RJ. et al. Scan optimization of gadolinium contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MRA of peripheral arteries with multiple bolus injections and in vitro validation of stenosis quantification. Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 17: 47-57 22 Czum JM, Ho VB, Hood MN. et al. Bolus-chase peripheral 3D MRA using a dual-rate contrast media injection. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12: 769-775 23 Hood MN, Ho VB, Foo TK. et al. High-resolution gadolinium-enhanced 3D MRA of the infrapopliteal arteries. Lessons for improving bolus-chase peripheral MRA. Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 20: 543-549 24 Kramer H, Michaely HJ, Matschl V. et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremities with a dedicated 36-element matrix coil at 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2007; 42: 477-483 25 Kramer H, Michaely HJ, Reiser MF. et al. Peripheral magnetic resonance angiography at 3.0 T. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 18: 135-138 26 Kramer H, Nikolaou K, Sommer W. et al. Peripheral MR angiography. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2009; 17: 91-100 27 Blaimer M, Breuer FA, Mueller M. et al. 2D-GRAPPA-operator for faster 3D parallel MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56: 1359-1364 28 Berg F, Bangard C, Bovenschulte H. et al. Feasibility of peripheral contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography at 3.0 Tesla with a hybrid technique: comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Invest Radiol 2008; 43: 642-649 29 Hany TF, Pfammatter T, Debatin JF. [Clinical use of contrast-enhanced MR angiography]. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 1998; 128: 544-551 30 Meissner OA, Rieger J, Weber C. et al. Critical limb ischemia: hybrid MR angiography compared with DSA. Radiology 2005; 235: 308-318 31 Carroll TJ, Korosec FR, Swan JS. et al. The effect of injection rate on time-resolved contrast-enhanced peripheral MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 14: 401-410 32 Lohan DG, Tomasian A, Saleh RS. et al. Ultra-low-dose, time-resolved contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid arteries at 3.0 tesla. Invest Radiol 2009; 44: 207-217 33 Kramer JH, Arnoldi E, François CJ. et al. Dynamic and static magnetic resonance angiography of the supra-aortic vessels at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparison of gadobutrol, gadobenate dimeglumine, and gadoterate meglumine at equimolar dose. Invest Radiol 2013; 48: 121-128 34 Neufang A, Dorweiler B, Espinola-Klein C. et al. [Limb salvage in diabetic foot syndrome with pedal bypass using the in-situ technique]. Zentralbl Chir 2003; 128: 715-719 35 Kreitner KF, Schmitt R. MultiHance-enhanced MR angiography of the peripheral run-off vessels in patients with diabetes. Eur Radiol 2007; 17 (Suppl. 06) F63-F68 36 Malyar NM, Freisinger E, Meyborg M. et al. Amputations and mortality in in-hospital treated patients with peripheral artery disease and diabetic foot syndrome. J Diabetes Complications 2016; 30: 1117-1122 37 Yucel EK, Kaufman JA, Geller SC. et al. Atherosclerotic occlusive disease of the lower extremity: prospective evaluation with two-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography. Radiology 1993; 187: 637-641 38 Davis WL, Warnock SH, Harnsberger HR. et al. Intracranial MRA: single volume vs. multiple thin slab 3D time-of-flight acquisition. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 15-21 39 Cronqvist M, Ståhlberg F, Larsson EM et al. Evaluation of time-of-flight and phase-contrast MRA sequences at 1.0 T for diagnosis of carotid artery disease. I. A phantom and volunteer study. Acta Radiol 1996; 37 (3 Pt 1): 267-277 40 Miyazaki M, Akahane M. Non-contrast enhanced MR angiography: established techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 35: 1-19 41 Miyazaki M, Isoda H. Non-contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the abdomen. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: 9-23 42 Miyazaki M, Lee VS. Nonenhanced MR angiography. Radiology 2008; 248: 20-43 43 Kramer H, Runge VM, Morelli JN. et al. Magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid arteries: comparison of unenhanced and contrast enhanced techniques. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 1667-1676 44 Edelman RR, Sheehan JJ, Dunkle E. et al. Quiescent-interval single-shot unenhanced magnetic resonance angiography of peripheral vascular disease: Technical considerations and clinical feasibility. Magn Reson Med 2010; 63: 951-988
