1naresh
Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1nareshArray ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) )Table 1:Demographic distribution of abnormality in patients with abnormal MRA and CA
MRA Patients (%) CA Patients (%) P Value Unilateral lesions* 19 (79.2) 19 (90.5) 1.0 Bilateral lesions 5 (20.8) 2 (9.5) .42 Any proximal lesion† regardless of whether distal lesion 22 (87.5) 18 (85.7) .28 Distal lesion only 2 (8.3) 3 (14.3) .18 Anterior circulation only‡ 19 (79.2) 15 (71.4) .36 Posterior circulation only 2 (8.3) 3 (14.3) 1.00 Anterior and posterior 3 (12.5) 3 (14.3) 1.00 Ipsilateral ≥ 2 lesions§ 16 (66.7) 16 (76.2) 1.00 Total lesions ≥ 5 3 (12.5) 4 (19.0) .29 Benign appearance 19 (79.2) 16 (76.2) .50 Aggressive appearance 5 (20.8) 5 (23.8) 1.00
Note:— MRA indicates MR angiography; CA, conventional angiography. Twenty-one CA and 24 MRA studies were abnormal and compared in 25 patients.
* Unilateral vs bilateral, P <0.05.
† Proximal vs distal, P = .08.
‡ Anterior vs posterior, P = .06.
§ Multifocal vs unifocal, P = .09.