Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2002 Jan 26;324(7331):198.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7331.198.

Use of magnetic resonance angiography to select candidates with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis for surgery: systematic review

Affiliations

Use of magnetic resonance angiography to select candidates with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis for surgery: systematic review

Marie E Westwood et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To determine if sufficient evidence exists to support the use of magnetic resonance angiography as a means of selecting patients with recently symptomatic high grade carotid stenosis for surgery.

Design: Systematic review of published research on the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance angiography, 1990-9.

Main outcome measures: Performance characteristics of diagnostic test.

Results: 126 potentially relevant articles were identified, but many articles failed to examine the performance of magnetic resonance angiography as a diagnostic test at the surgical decision thresholds used in major clinical trials on endarterectomy. 26 articles were included in a meta-analysis that showed a maximal joint sensitivity and specificity of 99% (95% confidence interval 98% to 100%) for identifying 70-99% stenosis and 90% (81% to 99%) for identifying 50-99% stenosis. Only four articles evaluated contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography.

Conclusions: Magnetic resonance angiography is accurate for selecting patients for carotid endarterectomy at the surgical decision thresholds established in the major endarterectomy trials, but the evidence is not very robust because of the heterogeneity of the studies included. Research is needed to determine the diagnostic performance of the most recent developments in magnetic resonance angiography, including contrast enhanced techniques, as well as to assess the impact of magnetic resonance angiography on surgical decision making and outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary receiver operating characteristic curve for magnetic resonance angiography: 70-99% stenosis is a positive result, and 0-69% stenosis and 100% occlusion are negative results. Straight line shows 95% confidence interval of Q*. Enlargement of region of sensitivity and specificity 90-100% shown for clarity
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary receiver operating characteristic curve for magnetic resonance angiography: 50-99% stenosis is a positive result, and 0-49% stenosis and 100% occlusion are negative results. Straight line shows 95% confidence interval of Q*

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Edelman RR. MR angiography: present and future. Am J Roentgenol. 1993;161:1–11. - PubMed
    1. Erdoes LS, Marek JM, Mills JL, Berman SS, Whitehill T, Hunter GC, et al. The relative contributions of carotid duplex scanning, magnetic resonance angiography, and cerebral arteriography to clinical decisionmaking: a prospective study in patients with carotid occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 1996;23:950–956. - PubMed
    1. Davies KN, Humphrey PR. Complications of cerebral angiography in patients with symptomatic carotid territory ischaemia screened by carotid ultrasound. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56:967–972. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barnett HJ, Taylor DW, Eliasziw M, Fox AJ, Ferguson GG, Haynes RB, et al. Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1415–1425. - PubMed
    1. Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European carotid surgery trial (ECST) Lancet. 1998;351:1379–1387. - PubMed

Publication types