Subtraction CTA: An Alternative Imaging Option for the Follow-Up of Flow-Diverter-Treated Aneurysms?

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Becske T,
   3. Kallmes DF,
   4. Saatci I, et al

   . Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology 2013;267:858–68 doi:10.1148/radiol.13120099 pmid:23418004

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. De Vries J,
   3. Boogaarts J,
   4. Van Norden A, et al

   . New generation of flow diverter (Surpass) for unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a prospective single-center study in 37 patients. Stroke 2013;44:1567–77 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000434 pmid:23686973

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   2. Lylyk P,
   3. Miranda C,
   4. Ceratto R, et al

   . Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience. Neurosurgery 2009;64:632–42; discussion 642–43; quiz N6 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000339109.98070.65 pmid:19349825

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Wakhloo AK,
   3. Gounis MJ

   . Revolution in aneurysm treatment: flow diversion to cure aneurysms: a paradigm shift. Neurosurgery 2014;61(Suppl 1):111–20 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000392 pmid:25032539

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Brinjikji W,
   3. Murad MH,
   4. Lanzino G, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:442–47 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.678151 pmid:23321438

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   2. Feuerberg I,
   3. Lindquist C,
   4. Lindqvist M, et al

   . Natural history of postoperative aneurysm rests. J Neurosurg 1987;66:30–34 doi:10.3171/jns.1987.66.1.0030 pmid:3783256

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. Dawkins AA,
   3. Evans AL,
   4. Wattam J, et al

   . Complications of cerebral angiography: a prospective analysis of 2,924 consecutive procedures. Neuroradiology 2007;49:753–59 doi:10.1007/s00234-007-0252-y pmid:17594083

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   2. Thiex R,
   3. Norbash AM,
   4. Frerichs KU

   . The safety of dedicated-team catheter-based diagnostic cerebral angiography in the era of advanced noninvasive imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:230–34 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1803 pmid:19779004

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Cloft HJ,
   3. Joseph GJ,
   4. Dion JE

   . Risk of cerebral angiography in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral aneurysm, and arteriovenous malformation: a meta-analysis. Stroke 1999;30:317–20 doi:10.1161/01.STR.30.2.317 pmid:9933266

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    2. Luo Z,
    3. Wang D,
    4. Sun X, et al

    . Comparison of the accuracy of subtraction CT angiography performed on 320-detector row volume CT with conventional CT angiography for diagnosis of intracranial aneurysms. Eur J Radiol;2012:81:118–22 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.05.003 pmid:21632193

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Ramasundara S,
    3. Mitchell PJ,
    4. Dowling RJ

    . Bone subtraction CT angiography for the detection of intracranial aneurysms. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2010;54:526–33 doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2010.02211.x pmid:21199429

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Harrison MJ,
    3. Johnson BA,
    4. Gardner GM, et al

    . Preliminary results on the management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms with magnetic resonance angiography and computed tomographic angiography. Neurosurgery 1997;40:947–55; discussion 955–57 doi:10.1097/00006123-199705000-00014 pmid:9149253

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    2. Dehdashti AR,
    3. Binaghi S,
    4. Uske A, et al

    . Comparison of multislice computerized tomography angiography and digital subtraction angiography in the postoperative evaluation of patients with clipped aneurysms. J Neurosurg 2006;104:395–403 doi:10.3171/jns.2006.104.3.395 pmid:16572652

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    2. Manninen AL,
    3. Isokangas JM,
    4. Karttunen A, et al

    . A comparison of radiation exposure between diagnostic CTA and DSA examinations of cerebral and cervicocerebral vessels. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:2038–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3123 pmid:22700752

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Golshani B,
    3. Lazzaro MA,
    4. Raslau F, et al

    . Surveillance imaging after intracranial stent implantation: non-invasive imaging compared with digital subtraction angiography. Neurointerv Surg 2013;5:361–65 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2012-010341 pmid:22641863

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Kidoh M,
    3. Utsunomiya D,
    4. Ikeda O, et al

    . Reduction of metallic coil artefacts in computed tomography body imaging: effects of a new single-energy metal artefact reduction algorithm. Eur Radiol 2016;26:1378–86 doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3950-6 pmid:26271621

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Yasaka K,
    3. Maeda E,
    4. Hanaoka S, et al

    . Single-energy metal artifact reduction for helical computed tomography of the pelvis in patients with metal hip prostheses. Jpn J Radiol 2016;34:1–8 doi:10.1007/s11604-016-0566-y pmid:27400700

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Pan YN,
    3. Chen G,
    4. Li AJ, et al

    . Reduction of metallic artifacts of the post-treatment intracranial aneurysms: effects of single energy metal artifact reduction algorithm. Clin Neuroradiol 2017 Nov 16. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1007/s00062-017-0644-2 pmid:29147735

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Asano Y,
    3. Tada A,
    4. Shinya T, et al

    . Utility of second - generation single-energy metal artifact reduction in helical lung computed tomography for patients with pulmonary arteriovenous malformation after coil embolization. Jpn J Radiol 2018;36:285–294 doi:10.1007/s11604-018-0723-6 pmid:29429141

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Fleiss J,
    3. Levin B,
    4. Cho Paik M

    . Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. Hoboken: John Wiley Sons; 2003:800
21. 21.↵
    2. Attali J,
    3. Benaissa A,
    4. Soize S, et al

    . Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated by flow diverter: comparison of three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography (3D-TOF-MRA) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) sequences with digital subtraction angiography as the gold standard. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:81–86 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011449 pmid:25352582

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Toni F,
    3. Marliani AF,
    4. Cirillo L, et al

    . 3T MRI in the evaluation of brain aneurysms treated with flow-diverting stents: preliminary experience. Neuroradiol J 2009;22:588–99 doi:10.1177/197140090902200512 pmid:24209405

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Patzig M,
    3. Forbrig R,
    4. Ertl L, et al

    . Intracranial aneurysms treated by flow-diverting stents: long-term follow-up with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2017;40:1713–22 doi:10.1007/s00270-017-1732-z pmid:28685380

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Yu SC,
    3. Lee KT,
    4. Lau TW, et al

    . Intravenous C-arm conebeam CT angiography following long-term flow-diverter implantation: technologic evaluation and preliminary results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:481–86 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4558 pmid:26585252

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    2. Yang P,
    3. Ahmed A,
    4. Schafer S, et al

    . Low-dose volume-of-interest C-arm CT imaging of intracranial stents and flow diverters. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:648–54 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4590 pmid:26494692

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Yasaka K,
    3. Kamiya K,
    4. Irie R, et al

    . Metal artefact reduction for patients with metallic dental fillings in helical neck computed tomography: comparison of adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D), forward-projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST) and AIDR 3D with single-energy metal artefact reduction (SEMAR). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016;45:20160114 doi:10.1259/dmfr.20160114 pmid:27268082

    CrossRefPubMed