The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Peripheral Arterial Disease: Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Performance of MR Angiography
Abstract
PURPOSE: To summarize the overall diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance (MR) angiography in the evaluation of peripheral arteriosclerotic occlusive disease and to identify the most important sources of variation in diagnostic accuracy between studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search strategy in MEDLINE and citation tracking were used to identify relevant English-language articles published since 1991. Each article was critically appraised for examination, patient, and study design characteristics. The accuracy data from different studies were analyzed by constructing summary receiver operating characteristic curves; multiple linear regression was used to examine the variation between study results. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included. There was much heterogeneity in the study results, which could not be explained as differences in the threshold for a positive result. About half of the variation was due to the type of MR angiographic examination and the extent of image evaluation. The relative diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for three-dimensional (3D) gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography compared with two-dimensional (2D) time-of-flight MR angiography was 7.46 (95% CI: 2.48, 22.20). The relative DOR for review of transverse source images or multiplanar reformations in addition to maximum intensity projections (MIPs) compared with the use of only MIPs for image evaluation was 4.53 (95% CI: 1.46, 13.87). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of 3D gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography is superior to that of 2D time-of-flight MR angiography. Also, the review of transverse source images or use of additional postprocessing techniques, such as multiplanar reformation, results in significantly better diagnostic performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hirsch, A. T., Haskal, Z. J., Hertzer, N. R., Bakal, C. W., Creager, M. A., Halperin, J. L., Hiratzka, L. F., Murphy, W. R. C., Olin, J. W., Puschett, J. B., et al. (2006) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.174526 · Cited by 3,708
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2261021292 · Cited by 3,215
The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance
Glas, A. S., Lijmer, J. G., Prins, M. H., Bonsel, G. J., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00177-x · Cited by 2,261
ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral artery diseases
Endorsed by: the European Stroke Organisation (ESO), Authors/Task Force Members, Tendera, M., Aboyans, V., Bartelink, M.-L., Baumgartner, I., Clément, D., Collet, J.-P., Cremonesi, A., De Carlo, M., et al. (2011) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehr211 · Cited by 1,506
Metadata
- Authors
- Nelemans, P. J., Leiner, T., de Vet, H. C. W., & van Engelshoven, J. M. A.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 217
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 105-114
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2034127219
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Peripheral Arterial Disease: Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Performance of MR Angiography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiology.217.1.r00oc11105
- The paper
- Nelemans, P. J., Leiner, T., de Vet, H. C. W., & van Engelshoven, J. M. A. (2000). Peripheral Arterial Disease: Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Performance of MR Angiography. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.217.1.r00oc11105
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.