This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ahn, K J Articles by Hahn, S T Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ahn, K J Articles by Hahn, S T

Re-circulation artefact at the carotid bulb can be differentiated from true stenosis

Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Dr K J Ahn, Department of Radiology, St. Mary's Hospital, #62 Youido-Dong, Youngdeungpo-Gu, Seoul 150-713, Korea

Re-circulation artefact developing secondary to vortex flow at the bulb of the internal carotid artery is very difficult to distinguish from true stenotic defect on two-dimensional Fourier transformed time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (2D-FT TOF MRA). The purpose of our study is to identify appropriate distinguishing features of re-circulation artefact. We included 45 extracranial carotid arteries collected from 25 patients who underwent both 2D-FT TOF MRA and contrast medium based angiography. Review of the 45 vessels demonstrated re-circulation artefact in 21 vessels, true stenotic defect in 8 vessels, and no filling defect in 16 vessels on 2D-FT TOF MRA. We compared the findings of re-circulation artefact and true stenotic defect in 29 vessels excluding the 16 vessels without filling defect. The following were evaluated: (1) preservation of posterior wall contour; (2) marginal character of filling defect; (3) darkness of filling defect; (4) involvement of common carotid artery by filling defect; (5) size of filling defect. In four out of the five evaluated items, statistically significant difference was present between re-circulation artefact group and true stenotic defect group (p<0.01 in all four items, ² analysis). Re-circulation artefact demonstrated the preservation of the posterior wall contour (19/21), ill-defined margin (19/21), less dark defect (18/21), and no involvement of the common carotid artery (19/21). On the contrary true stenotic defect demonstrated focal loss of posterior wall contour (8/8), sharp margin (8/8), dark defect (8/8), and involvement of common carotid artery (4/8). No significant difference was noted in the size of the defect between the two groups (p>0.05). The specificity of 2D-FT TOF MRA for carotid stenosis was markedly increased after application of above signs. These distinguishing signs are very helpful in differentiating re-circulation artefact from true stenotic defect.