Skip to main content

Table 2 Image Quality Scores and Inter-rater Agreement

From: Nonenhanced hybridized arterial spin labeled magnetic resonance angiography of the extracranial carotid arteries using a fast low angle shot readout at 3 Tesla

 

Image Quality

 
 

hASL

TOF

CEMRA

Inter-rater Agreement (AC1)

Arterial Location

R1

R2

R1

R2

R1

R2

hASL

TOF

CEMRA

1. left CCA *

2.0(2.7) **

2.0(1.9)

2.0(2.3)

2.0(1.9)

4.0(4.0) ***

4.0(3.7) ***

0.39

0.37

0.71

2. right CCA *

2.0(2.6)

2.0(2.1) **

2.0(2.3)

2.0(1.8)

4.0(4.0) ***

4.0(3.8) ***

0.46

0.34

0.78

3. left bulb and prox. ICA *

4.0(3.7) **

4.0(3.4) **

3.0(2.8)

3.0(2.6)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.9) ***

0.67

0.42

0.91

4. right bulb and prox. ICA *

4.0(3.6) **

4.0(3.5) **

3.0(2.8)

3.0(2.6)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.9) ***

0.75

0.39

0.91

5. left mid-cervical ICA *

4.0(3.6) **

4.0(3.6) **

3.0(2.9)

3.0(2.6)

4.0(4.0) ***

4.0(3.9) ***

0.71

0.38

0.94

6. right mid-cervical ICA *

4.0(3.6) **

4.0(3.6) **

3.0(2.8)

3.0(2.6)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.9) ***

0.79

0.45

0.97

7. left petrous ICA *

3.5(2.8) **

4.0(3.4) **

1.5(1.9)

2.0(1.7)

4.0(4.0) ***

4.0(4.0) **

0.47

0.36

0.94

8. right petrous ICA *

4.0(3.0)

4.0(3.4) **

2.0(2.2)

2.0(1.8)

4.0(4.0) ***

4.0(4.0) **

0.62

0.30

0.91

9. left ECA *

4.0(3.5) **

4.0(3.4) **

3.0(2.6)

2.0(2.4)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.7) ***

0.47

0.56

0.81

10. right ECA *

4.0(3.4) **

4.0(3.4) **

3.0(2.6)

2.0(2.5)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.8) ***

0.60

0.60

0.78

All Locations *

4.0(3.3) **

3.0(3.1) **

3.0(2.6)

2.0(2.3)

4.0(3.9) ***

4.0(3.8) ***

0.61

0.43 ****

0.87 ****

  1. Image quality data are presented as median (mean); 1: non-diagnostic, 4: excellent
  2. Data summarize findings from locations depicted by all three techniques
  3. R1 reviewer 1, R2 reviewer 2, CCA common carotid artery, ICA internal carotid artery, ECA external carotid artery
  4. * P < 0.05, Bonferroni-corrected Friedman test across techniques
  5. ** P < 0.05 vs. TOF for the same reviewer
  6. *** P < 0.05 vs. hASL and TOF for the same reviewer
  7. **** P < 0.05 vs. hASL for AC1 value