2009Beijing Medical JournalRequires access

A comparative study with TCD and MRA and DSA in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases caused by intracranial artery stenosis

Jing Wang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To compare and evaluate the diagnostic values of transcranial Doppler (TCD),magnetic resonance angiograpby (MRA) and digital subtraction angiography(DSA)in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases caused by intracranial artery stenosis.Methods 460 patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases who were diagnosed as intracranial artery stenosis by TCD were examined by MRA.Among them,90 cases were assessed by digital subtraction angiography(DSA).Results TCD showed the middle cerebral artery stenosis in 436 vessels,while MRA showed the stenosis in 425,The coincidence rate between the two methods was 93.3%.When compared with DSA,the sensitivity of TCD was 83.2%,the sensitivity of MRA was 72.0%.Conclusions Both TCD and MRA are important and noninvasive methods for the diagnosis of intracranial artery stenosis. The sensitivity of TCD is higher than MRA and the combination of the two methods can be able to provide a more accurate diagnosis.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To compare and evaluate the diagnostic values of transcranial Doppler (TCD),magnetic resonance angiograpby (MRA) and digital subtraction angiography(DSA)in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases caused by intracranial artery stenosis.Methods 460 patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases who were diagnosed as intracranial artery stenosis by TCD were examined by MRA.Among them,90 cases were assessed by digital subtraction angiography(DSA).Results TCD showed the middle cerebral artery stenosis in 436 vessels,while MRA showed the stenosis in 425,The coincidence rate between the two methods was 93.3%.When compared with DSA,the sensitivity of TCD was 83.2%,the sensitivity of MRA was 72.0%.Conclusions Both TCD and MRA are important and noninvasive methods for the diagnosis of intracranial artery stenosis. The sensitivity of TCD is higher than MRA and the combination of the two methods can be able to provide a more accurate diagnosis.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To compare and evaluate the diagnostic values of transcranial Doppler (TCD),magnetic resonance angiograpby (MRA) and digital subtraction angiography(DSA)in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases caused by intracranial artery stenosis.Methods 460 patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases who were diagnosed as intracranial artery stenosis by TCD were examined by MRA.Among them,90 cases were assessed by digital subtraction angiography(DSA).Results TCD showed the middle cerebral artery stenosis in 436 vessels,while MRA showed the stenosis in 425,The coincidence rate between the two methods was 93.3%.When compared with DSA,the sensitivity of TCD was 83.2%,the sensitivity of MRA was 72.0%.Conclusions Both TCD and MRA are important and noninvasive methods for the diagnosis of intracranial artery stenosis. The sensitivity of TCD is higher than MRA and the combination of the two methods can be able to provide a more accurate diagnosis.

Key concepts: Medicine, Digital subtraction angiography, Transcranial Doppler, Stenosis, Magnetic resonance angiography, Radiology, Middle cerebral artery, Magnetic resonance imaging

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A comparative study with TCD and MRA and DSA in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular diseases caused by intracranial artery stenosis — Research Paper | ScholarLens