↓ Skip to main content

The diagnostic value of non-contrast enhanced quiescent interval single shot (QISS) magnetic resonance angiography at 3T for lower extremity peripheral arterial disease, in comparison to CT…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The diagnostic value of non-contrast enhanced quiescent interval single shot (QISS) magnetic resonance angiography at 3T for lower extremity peripheral arterial disease, in comparison to CT angiography
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12968-016-0294-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gang Wu, Jun Yang, Tianjing Zhang, John N. Morelli, Shivraman Giri, Xiaoming Li, Wenlin Tang

Abstract

The high incidence of renal insufficiency in patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease raises the concern for nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) with respect to contrast enhanced MRA. The risk of NSF is eliminated with non-contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. The purpose of the current study is to compare image quality and diagnostic performance of non-contrast enhanced Quiescent Interval Single Shot (QISS) magnetic resonance angiography at 3 T versus CT angiography for evaluation of lower extremity Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD). 32 consecutive patients (23 male, 9 female, age range 40-81 years, average age 61.97 years) with clinically suspected lower extremity PAD underwent QISS MRA and CTA. 19 of 32 patients underwent Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA). Image quality of MRA was compared with CTA by two radiologists with 10 and 8 years' experience according to a 4-point scale. The Kappa test was used to determine the intermodality agreement between MRA and CTA in stenosis assessment, and interobserver agreement with each method. Sensitivity and specificity of CTA and MRA in detecting hemodynamically significant stenosis (≥50 %) were compared, with DSA serving as reference standard when available. Image quality of QISS MRA was rated 3.70 ± 0.49 by reader 1, and 3.72 ± 0.47 by reader 2, significantly lower than that of CTA (3.80 ± 0.44 and 3.82 ± 0.42, P < 0.001 for both readers). Intermodality agreement between MRA and CTA was excellent for assessment of stenosis (Kappa = 0.923 ± 0.013 for reader 1, 0.930 ± 0.012 for reader 2). Interobserver agreement was 0.936 ± 0.012 for CTA and 0.935 ± 0.011 for MRA. For readers 1 and 2 respectively, the sensitivity of QISS was 94.25 and 93.26 % (versus 90.11 and 89.13 % for CTA, P > 0.05), and specificity of QISS was 96.70 and 97.75 % (versus 96.55 and 96.51 % for CTA, P > 0.05). For heavily calcified segments, sensitivity of QISS (95.83 and 95.83 %) was significantly higher than that of CTA (74.19 and 76.67 %, P < 0.05). QISS is a reliable alternative to CTA for evaluation of lower extremity PAD, and may be suitable as a first-line screening examination in patients with contraindications to intravenous contrast administration.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2016.
All research outputs
#3,376,023
of 8,566,293 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#306
of 601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,409
of 249,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#31
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,566,293 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 60th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 601 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 249,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.