MR angiography of the aorta

  • Dominik Weishaupt


Current imaging modalities for non-invasive assessment of the abdominal and thoracic aorta include sonography, computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). Compared to sonography, MRA is less operator dependent and less limited by patient-specific factors such as bowel air. The main advantages of MRA over CTA include the lack of ionizing radiation and the absence of a potentially nephrotoxic contrast agent.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baum RA, Rutter CM, Sunshine JH, Blebea JS, Blebea J, Carpenter JP et al (1995) Multicenter trial to evaluate vascular magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremity. American College of Radiology Rapid Technology Assessment Group. JAMA 274(11):875–880PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chao PW, Goldberg H, Doumoulin CL, Wehrli FW (1989) Comparison of time-of-flight versus phase contrast techniques: visualization of the intra-and extracerebral carotid artery. In: Book of Abstracts Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Amsterdam, NL: Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, p 165.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Choe YH, Han BK, Koh EM, Kim DK, Do YS, Lee WR (2000) Takayasu’s arteritis: assessment of disease activity with contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 175(2):505–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Debatin JF, Ting RH, Wegmuller H, Sommer FG, Fredrickson JO, Brosnan TJ et al (1994) Renal artery blood flow: quantitation with phase-contrast MR imaging with and without breath holding. Radiology 190(2):371–378PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Earls JP, Rofsky NM, DeCorato DR, Krinsky GA, Weinreb JC (1996) Breath-hold single-dose gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional MR aortography: usefulness of a timing examination and MR power injector. Radiology 201(3):705–710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edelman RR, Zhao B, Liu C, Wentz KU, Mattle HP, Finn JP et al (1989) MR angiography and dynamic flow evaluation of the portal venous system. Am J Roentgenol 153(4):755–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Evans AJ, Sostman HD, Knelson MH, Spritzer CE, Newman GE, Paine SS et al (1993) 1992 ARRS Executive Council Award. Detection of deep venous thrombosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging with contrast venography. Am J Roentgenol 161(1):131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fain SB, King BF, Breen JF, Kruger DG, Riederer SJ (2001) High-spatial-resolution contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the renal arteries: a prospective comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Radiology 218(2):481–490PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gilfeather M, Yoon HC, Siegelman ES, Axel L, Stolpen AH, Shlansky-Goldberg RD et al (1999) Renal artery stenosis: evaluation with conventional angiography versus gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. Radiology 210:367–372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goyen M, Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU, Debatin JF, Bosk S, Ruehm SG (2001) 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 14(5):602–607PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hagspiel KD, Leung DA, Angle JF, Spinosa DJ, Pao DG, de Lange EE et al (2002) MR angiography of the mesenteric vasculature. Radiol Clin North Am 40(4):867–886PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hany TF, Debatin JF, Leung DA, Pfammatter T (1997) Evaluation of the aortoiliac and renal arteries: comparison of breath-hold, contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional MR angiography with conventional catheter angiography. Radiology 204(2):357–362PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hany TF, McKinnon GC, Leung DA, Pfammatter T, Debatin JF (1997) Optimization of contrast timing for breath-hold three-dimensional MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 7(3):551–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hilfiker PR, Quick HH, Pfammatter T, Schmidt M, Debatin JF (1999) Three-dimensional MR angiography of a nitinol-based abdominal aortic stent graft: assessment of heating and imaging characteristics. Eur Radiol 9(9):1775–1780PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho VB, Foo TK (1998) Optimization of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography using an automated bolus-detection algorithm (MR SmartPrep). Original investigation. Invest Radiol 33(9):515–523PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holland GA, Dougherty L, Carpenter JP, Golden MA, Gilfeather M, Slossman F et al (1996) Breath-hold ultrafast three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the aorta and the renal and other visceral abdominal arteries. Am J Roentgenol 166(4):971–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leung DA, Hoffmann U, Pfammatter T, Hany TF, Rainoni L, Hilfiker P et al (1999) Magnetic resonance angiography versus duplex sonography for diagnosing renovascular disease. Hypertension 33(2):726–731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lutz AM, Willmann JK, Pfammatter T, Lachat M, Wildermuth S, Marincek B et al (2003) Evaluation of aortoiliac aneurysm before endovascular repair: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography with multidetector row computed tomographic angiography MR angiography of the aorta with an automated analysis software tool. J Vase Surg 27:629–637Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meaney JF, Prince MR, Nostrant TT, Stanley JC (1997) Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of visceral arteries in patients with suspected chronic mesenteric ischemia. J Magn Reson Imaging 7(1):171–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Novick AC (1981) Atherosclerotic renovascular disease. J Urol 126:567–572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pelc NJ, Herfkens RJ, Shimakawa A, Enzmann DR (1989) Phase contrast cine magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Quarterly 4:229–254Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Prince MR (1994) Gadolinium-enhanced MR aortography. Radiology 191(1):155–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Prince MR, Narasimham DL, Jacoby WT, Williams DM, Cho KJ, Marx MV et al (1996) Three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the thoracic aorta. Am J Roentgenol 166(6):1387–1397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prince MR, Yucel EK, Kaufmann JA, Harrison DC, Geller SC (1993) Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional abdominal MR-angiography. J Magn Reson Med 3:877–881Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Riederer SJ, Bernstein MA, Brenn JF, Busse RF, Ehman RL, Fain SB (2000) Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MR angiography with realtime fluoroscopic triggering: design, specifica-tions and technical reliability in 330 patient studies. Radiology 215:584–593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ruehm SG, Weishaupt D, Debatin JF (2000) Contrast-enhanced MR angiography in patients with aortic occlusion (Leriche syndrome). J Magn Reson Imaging 11(4):401–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schoenberg SO, Knopp MV, Bock M, Kallinowski F, Just A, Essig M et al (1997) Renal artery stenosis: grading of hemodynamic changes with cine phase-contrast MR blood flow measurements. Radiology 203(1):45–53Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schoenberg SO, Knopp MV, Londy F, Krishnan S, Zuna I, Lang N et al (2002) Morphologie and functional magnetic resonance imaging of renal artery stenosis: a multireader tricenter study. J Am Soc Nephrol 13(1):158–169PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Simonetti OP, Finn JP, White RD, Laub G, Henry DA (1996) “Black blood” T2-weighted inversion-recovery MR imaging of the heart. Radiology 199(1):49–57Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steffens JC, Bourne MW, Sakuma H, O’Sullivan M, Higgins CB (1994) Quantification of collateral blood flow in coarctation of the aorta by velocity encoded cine magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 90(2):937–943PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Steiner P, McKinnon GC, Romanowski B, Goehde SC, Hany T, Debatin JF (1997) Contrast-enhanced, ultrafast 3D pulmonary MR an-giography in a single breath-hold: initial assessment of imaging performance. J Magn Reson Imaging 7(1):177–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sueyoshi E, Sakamoto I, Matsuoka Y, Ogawa Y, Hayashi H, Hashmi R et al (1999) Aortoiliac and lower extremity arteries: comparison of three-dimensional dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR angiography and conventional angiography. Radiology 210(3):683–688PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Thornton J, O’Callaghan J, Walshe J, O’Brien E, Varghese JC, Lee MJ (1999) Comparison of digital subtraction angiography with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Eur Radiol 9(5):930–934PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Toussaint JF, LaMuraglia GM, Southern JF, Fuster V (1996) Magnetic resonance images lipid, fibrous, calcified, hemorrhagic, and thrombotic components of human atherosclerosis in vivo. Circulation 94:932–938PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang Y, Johnston DL, Breen JF (1996) Dynamic MR digital subtraction angiography using contrast-enhancement, fast data acquisition, and complex subtraction. Magn Reson Med 36:551–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weiger M, Pruessmann KP, Kassner A, Roditi G, Lawton T, Reid A et al (2000) Contrast-enhanced 3D MRA using SENSE. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:671–677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weishaupt D, Ruhm SG, Binkert CA, Schmidt M, Patak MA, Steybe F et al (2000) Equilibrium-phase MR angiography of the aortoiliac and renal arteries using a blood pool contrast agent. Am J Roentgenol 175(1): 189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominik Weishaupt

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations