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
. 2007 Sep;49(9):703-13.
doi: 10.1007/s00234-007-0266-5. Epub 2007 Jul 24.

MR angiography in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with Guglielmi detachable coils: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations

MR angiography in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with Guglielmi detachable coils: systematic review and meta-analysis

Thomas C Kwee et al. Neuroradiology. 2007 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to systematically review published data on the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) compared with digital subtraction angiography as reference standard in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with Guglielmi detachable coils.

Methods: A systematic search for relevant studies was performed of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each study. A meta-analysis of the reported sensitivity and specificity of each study was performed.

Results: The inclusion criteria were met by 16 studies. The studies had moderate methodological quality. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of non-enhanced time-of-flight MRA (TOF-MRA) for the detection of residual flow (within the aneurysmal neck and/or coil mesh) were 83.3% (95% CI 70.3-91.3%) and 90.6% (95% CI 80.4-95.8%), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) for the detection of residual flow were 86.8% (95% CI 71.4-94.5%) and 91.9% (95% CI 79.8-97.0%), respectively. All pooled estimates were subject to heterogeneity. There were no statistically significant differences in pooled sensitivity and specificity between TOF-MRA and CE-MRA.

Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that both TOF-MRA and CE-MRA achieve a moderate to high diagnostic performance. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution because the included studies were of moderate methodological quality and all pooled estimates were subject to heterogeneity. More well-designed studies are required to confirm the current results and MRA at higher field strength (>1.5 T) needs to be further explored.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005 Aug;26(7):1723-31 - PubMed
    1. Stroke. 2001 Sep;32(9):1998-2004 - PubMed
    1. J Neurosurg. 1991 Jul;75(1):1-7 - PubMed
    1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005 Jun-Jul;26(6):1349-56 - PubMed
    1. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1999 Mar-Apr;23(2):216-23 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources