Optimal MRI Sequence for Identifying Occlusion Location in Acute Stroke: Which Value of Time-Resolved Contrast-Enhanced MRA?

References

1. 1.↵
   2. del Zoppo GJ,
   3. Poeck K,
   4. Pessin MS, et al

   . Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in acute thrombotic and embolic stroke. Ann Neurol 1992;32:78–86

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Bhatia R,
   3. Hill MD,
   4. Shobha N, et al

   . Low rates of acute recanalization with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in ischemic stroke: real-world experience and a call for action. Stroke 2010;41:2254–58

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   2. Mazighi M,
   3. Serfaty JM,
   4. Labreuche J, et al

   . Comparison of intravenous alteplase with a combined intravenous-endovascular approach in patients with stroke and confirmed arterial occlusion (RECANALISE study): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:802–09

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Vendrell JF,
   3. Mernes R,
   4. Nagot N, et al

   . Evaluation of an intravenous-endovascular strategy in patients with acute proximal middle cerebral artery occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:603–08

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   2. Leker RR,
   3. Eichel R,
   4. Gomori JM, et al

   . Stent-based thrombectomy versus intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in patients with acute middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke 2012;43:3389–91

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   2. Breuer L,
   3. Schellinger PD,
   4. Huttner HB, et al

   . Feasibility and safety of magnetic resonance imaging-based thrombolysis in patients with stroke on awakening: initial single-centre experience. Int J Stroke 2010;5:68–73

   PubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. Köhrmann M,
   3. Schellinger PD

   . Stroke-MRI: extending the time-window: recent trials and clinical practice. Int J Stroke 2007;2:53–54

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Stock KW,
   3. Radue EW,
   4. Jacob AL, et al

   . Intracranial arteries: prospective blinded comparative study of MR angiography and DSA in 50 patients. Radiology 1995;195:451–56

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Stock KW,
   3. Wetzel S,
   4. Kirsch E, et al

   . Anatomic evaluation of the circle of Willis: MR angiography versus intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1996;17:1495–99

   Abstract
10. 10.↵
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Takahashi M,
    4. Mabuchi N, et al

    . Intracranial vascular stenosis and occlusion: diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional, Fourier transform, time-of-flight MR angiography. Radiology 1994;193:187–93

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    2. Hirai T,
    3. Korogi Y,
    4. Ono K, et al

    . Prospective evaluation of suspected stenoocclusive disease of the intracranial artery: combined MR angiography and CT angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23:93–101

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Wintermark M,
    3. Sanelli PC,
    4. Albers GW, et al

    . Imaging recommendations for acute stroke and transient ischemic attack patients: a joint statement by the American Society of Neuroradiology, the American College of Radiology, and the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:E117–27

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    2. Ishimaru H,
    3. Ochi M,
    4. Morikawa M, et al

    . Accuracy of pre- and postcontrast 3D time-of-flight MR angiography in patients with acute ischemic stroke: correlation with catheter angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:923–26

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    2. Sohn CH,
    3. Sevick RJ,
    4. Frayne R

    . Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the intracranial circulation. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2003;11:599–614

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Flacke S,
    3. Urbach H,
    4. Keller E, et al

    . Middle cerebral artery (MCA) susceptibility sign at susceptibility-based perfusion MR imaging: clinical importance and comparison with hyperdense MCA sign at CT 1. Radiology 2000;215:476–82

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    2. Rovira A,
    3. Orellana P,
    4. Alvarez-Sabín J, et al

    . Hyperacute ischemic stroke: middle cerebral artery susceptibility sign at echo-planar gradient-echo MR imaging. Radiology 2004;232:466–73

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    2. Naggara O,
    3. Raymond J,
    4. Domingo Ayllon M, et al

    . T2* “susceptibility vessel sign” demonstrates clot location and length in acute ischemic stroke. PLoS One 2013;8:e76727

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Latchaw RE,
    3. Alberts MJ,
    4. Lev MH, et al

    . Recommendations for imaging of acute ischemic stroke: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke 2009;40:3646–78

    FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. Jauch EC,
    3. Saver JL,
    4. Adams HP, et al

    . Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2013;44:870–947

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Anzalone N,
    3. Scomazzoni F,
    4. Castellano R, et al

    . Carotid artery stenosis: intraindividual correlations of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography, contrast-enhanced MR angiography, conventional DSA, and rotational angiography for detection and grading. Radiology 2005;236:204–13

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    2. Yang CW,
    3. Carr JC,
    4. Futterer SF, et al

    . Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the carotid and vertebrobasilar circulations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:2095–101

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Yang JJ,
    3. Hill MD,
    4. Morrish WF, et al

    . Comparison of pre- and postcontrast 3D time-of-flight MR angiography for the evaluation of distal intracranial branch occlusions in acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23:557–67

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Kim JJ,
    3. Dillon WP,
    4. Glastonbury CM, et al

    . Sixty-four-section multidetector CT angiography of carotid arteries: a systematic analysis of image quality and artifacts. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:91–99

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    2. Schreiber S,
    3. Schreiber F,
    4. Glaser M, et al

    . Detecting artery occlusion and critical flow diminution in the case of an acute ischemic stroke: methodological pitfalls of common vascular diagnostic methods. Ultraschall Med 1980 2011;32:274–80

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Meckel S,
    3. Maier M,
    4. Ruiz DSM, et al

    . MR angiography of dural arteriovenous fistulas: diagnosis and follow-up after treatment using a time-resolved 3D contrast-enhanced technique. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:877–84

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Unlu E,
    3. Temizoz O,
    4. Albayram S, et al

    . Contrast-enhanced MR 3D angiography in the assessment of brain AVMs. Eur J Radiol 2006;60:367–78

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Raoult H,
    3. Ferré JC,
    4. Morandi X, et al

    . Quality-evaluation scheme for cerebral time-resolved 3D contrast-enhanced MR angiography techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:1480–87

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    2. Costalat V,
    3. Machi P,
    4. Lobotesis K, et al

    . Rescue, combined, and stand-alone thrombectomy in the management of large vessel occlusion stroke using the Solitaire device: a prospective 50-patient single-center study: timing, safety, and efficacy. Stroke 2011;42:1929–35

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    2. Kozerke S,
    3. Tsao J,
    4. Razavi R, et al

    . Accelerating cardiac cine 3D imaging using k-t BLAST. Magn Reson Med 2004;52:19–26

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    2. Ferré JC,
    3. Raoult H,
    4. Breil S, et al

    . Supra-aortic arteries: three-dimensional time-resolved k-t BLAST contrast-enhanced MRA using a nondedicated body coil at 3 Tesla in acute ischemic stroke. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;40:1056–63

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Gibo H,
    3. Lenkey C,
    4. Rhoton AL Jr.

    . Microsurgical anatomy of the supraclinoid portion of the internal carotid artery. J Neurosurg 1981;55:560–74

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    2. Shapiro M,
    3. Becske T,
    4. Riina HA, et al

    . Toward an endovascular internal carotid artery classification system. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:230–36

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    2. Hinkmann FM,
    3. Voit HL,
    4. Anders K, et al

    . Ultra-fast carotid CT-angiography: low versus standard volume contrast material protocol for a 128-slice CT-system. Invest Radiol 2009;44:257–64

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Rerkasem K,
    3. Rothwell PM

    . Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;CD001081
35. 35.↵
    2. Kramer H,
    3. Runge VM,
    4. Morelli JN, et al

    . Magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid arteries: comparison of unenhanced and contrast enhanced techniques. Eur Radiol 2011;21:1667–76

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    2. Frölich AM,
    3. Schrader D,
    4. Klotz E, et al

    . 4D CT angiography more closely defines intracranial thrombus burden than single-phase CT angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1908–13

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
37. 37.↵
    2. Machi P,
    3. Lobotesis K,
    4. Maldonado IL, et al

    . Endovascular treatment of tandem occlusions of the anterior cerebral circulation with Solitaire FR thrombectomy system: initial experience. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:3479–84

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    2. Soize S,
    3. Kadziolka K,
    4. Estrade L, et al

    . Mechanical thrombectomy in acute stroke: prospective pilot trial of the Solitaire FR device while under conscious sedation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:360–65

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
39. 39.↵
    2. Parikh PT,
    3. Sandhu GS,
    4. Blackham KA, et al

    . Evaluation of image quality of a 32-channel versus a 12-channel head coil at 1.5T for MR imaging of the brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:365–73

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
40. 40.↵
    2. De Zwart JA,
    3. Ledden PJ,
    4. van Gelderen P, et al

    . Signal-to-noise ratio and parallel imaging performance of a 16-channel receive-only brain coil array at 3.0 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:22–26

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science