The limitations of magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis: Comparative analysis with conventional arteriography

Sheela T. Patel, Joseph L Mills, Gerlinde Tynan-Cuisinier, Kaoru R. Goshima, Alex Westerband, John D Hughes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used as a screening modality for the detection of renal artery stenosis. However, evidence supporting its utility in clinical practice is lacking; few rigorous studies have compared MRA with contrast arteriography (CA). After making anecdotal clinical observations that MRA sometimes overestimated the degree of renal artery stenosis, we decided to determine the interobserver variability, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of MRA compared with CA. Methods: From September 1999 to April 2003, we evaluated 68 renal arteries in 34 patients with clinically suspected renal artery stenosis using both MRA and CA. All studies were independently reviewed by four blinded observers. Renal arteries were categorized by MRA as normal, <50%, and >50% stenosis/occlusion. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRA detection of renal artery stenosis were compared to CA as the gold standard. Interobserver variability (κ) was also calculated. Results: MRA demonstrated 87% sensitivity, 69% specificity, 85% accuracy, 95% negative predictive value, and 51% positive predictive value for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Interobserver agreement was moderate for MRA (κ = 0.53) and good for CA (κ = 0.76). In 21 arteries (31%), MRA was falsely positive. Conclusions: In patients with a high clinical suspicion of renal artery stenosis, MRA is 87% sensitive in the detection of >50% stenosis. However, MRA is relatively nonspecific compared with CA and results in significant overestimation of renal artery stenosis in nearly one third of patients. To reduce unnecessary CA, clinicians should consider supplemental studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)462-468
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume41
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2005

Fingerprint

Renal Artery Obstruction
Magnetic Resonance Angiography
Angiography
Observer Variation
Renal Artery
Sensitivity and Specificity
Pathologic Constriction
Gadolinium
Arteries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

The limitations of magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis : Comparative analysis with conventional arteriography. / Patel, Sheela T.; Mills, Joseph L; Tynan-Cuisinier, Gerlinde; Goshima, Kaoru R.; Westerband, Alex; Hughes, John D.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, Vol. 41, No. 3, 03.2005, p. 462-468.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ab1bcb3a233d4bd3bb91252f41ed6c1d,
title = "The limitations of magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis: Comparative analysis with conventional arteriography",
abstract = "Purpose: Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used as a screening modality for the detection of renal artery stenosis. However, evidence supporting its utility in clinical practice is lacking; few rigorous studies have compared MRA with contrast arteriography (CA). After making anecdotal clinical observations that MRA sometimes overestimated the degree of renal artery stenosis, we decided to determine the interobserver variability, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of MRA compared with CA. Methods: From September 1999 to April 2003, we evaluated 68 renal arteries in 34 patients with clinically suspected renal artery stenosis using both MRA and CA. All studies were independently reviewed by four blinded observers. Renal arteries were categorized by MRA as normal, <50{\%}, and >50{\%} stenosis/occlusion. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRA detection of renal artery stenosis were compared to CA as the gold standard. Interobserver variability (κ) was also calculated. Results: MRA demonstrated 87{\%} sensitivity, 69{\%} specificity, 85{\%} accuracy, 95{\%} negative predictive value, and 51{\%} positive predictive value for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Interobserver agreement was moderate for MRA (κ = 0.53) and good for CA (κ = 0.76). In 21 arteries (31{\%}), MRA was falsely positive. Conclusions: In patients with a high clinical suspicion of renal artery stenosis, MRA is 87{\%} sensitive in the detection of >50{\%} stenosis. However, MRA is relatively nonspecific compared with CA and results in significant overestimation of renal artery stenosis in nearly one third of patients. To reduce unnecessary CA, clinicians should consider supplemental studies.",
author = "Patel, {Sheela T.} and Mills, {Joseph L} and Gerlinde Tynan-Cuisinier and Goshima, {Kaoru R.} and Alex Westerband and Hughes, {John D}",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2004.12.045",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "462--468",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The limitations of magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis

T2 - Comparative analysis with conventional arteriography

AU - Patel, Sheela T.

AU - Mills, Joseph L

AU - Tynan-Cuisinier, Gerlinde

AU - Goshima, Kaoru R.

AU - Westerband, Alex

AU - Hughes, John D

PY - 2005/3

Y1 - 2005/3

N2 - Purpose: Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used as a screening modality for the detection of renal artery stenosis. However, evidence supporting its utility in clinical practice is lacking; few rigorous studies have compared MRA with contrast arteriography (CA). After making anecdotal clinical observations that MRA sometimes overestimated the degree of renal artery stenosis, we decided to determine the interobserver variability, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of MRA compared with CA. Methods: From September 1999 to April 2003, we evaluated 68 renal arteries in 34 patients with clinically suspected renal artery stenosis using both MRA and CA. All studies were independently reviewed by four blinded observers. Renal arteries were categorized by MRA as normal, <50%, and >50% stenosis/occlusion. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRA detection of renal artery stenosis were compared to CA as the gold standard. Interobserver variability (κ) was also calculated. Results: MRA demonstrated 87% sensitivity, 69% specificity, 85% accuracy, 95% negative predictive value, and 51% positive predictive value for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Interobserver agreement was moderate for MRA (κ = 0.53) and good for CA (κ = 0.76). In 21 arteries (31%), MRA was falsely positive. Conclusions: In patients with a high clinical suspicion of renal artery stenosis, MRA is 87% sensitive in the detection of >50% stenosis. However, MRA is relatively nonspecific compared with CA and results in significant overestimation of renal artery stenosis in nearly one third of patients. To reduce unnecessary CA, clinicians should consider supplemental studies.

AB - Purpose: Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is commonly used as a screening modality for the detection of renal artery stenosis. However, evidence supporting its utility in clinical practice is lacking; few rigorous studies have compared MRA with contrast arteriography (CA). After making anecdotal clinical observations that MRA sometimes overestimated the degree of renal artery stenosis, we decided to determine the interobserver variability, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of MRA compared with CA. Methods: From September 1999 to April 2003, we evaluated 68 renal arteries in 34 patients with clinically suspected renal artery stenosis using both MRA and CA. All studies were independently reviewed by four blinded observers. Renal arteries were categorized by MRA as normal, <50%, and >50% stenosis/occlusion. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRA detection of renal artery stenosis were compared to CA as the gold standard. Interobserver variability (κ) was also calculated. Results: MRA demonstrated 87% sensitivity, 69% specificity, 85% accuracy, 95% negative predictive value, and 51% positive predictive value for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Interobserver agreement was moderate for MRA (κ = 0.53) and good for CA (κ = 0.76). In 21 arteries (31%), MRA was falsely positive. Conclusions: In patients with a high clinical suspicion of renal artery stenosis, MRA is 87% sensitive in the detection of >50% stenosis. However, MRA is relatively nonspecific compared with CA and results in significant overestimation of renal artery stenosis in nearly one third of patients. To reduce unnecessary CA, clinicians should consider supplemental studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=17144389317&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=17144389317&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2004.12.045

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2004.12.045

M3 - Article

C2 - 15838481

AN - SCOPUS:17144389317

VL - 41

SP - 462

EP - 468

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

IS - 3

ER -