Table 3.
Evaluation criteria for CAPR time-resolved CE-MRA of peripheral vascular malformations
| Category 1: Identification of feeding vessel(s) |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 2: Identification of early filling nidus |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 3: Ability to adequately characterize venous outflow |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 4: Ability to identify normal venous structures |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 5: Demonstration of malformation extent (focal, multifocal, diffuse) |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 6: Identification of relationship and involvement of malformation with tissue |
| 1 Not adequately depicted |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 7: Vessel sharpness |
| 1 Poor spatial resolution, little or no definition of structure |
| 2 Slight blurring of vessels, likely to impair diagnosis |
| 3 Good visualization of vessel margins, adequate for diagnosis |
| 4 Excellent visualization of vessel margins |
| Category 8: Presence of artifact (motion, undersampling, aliasing) |
| 1 Severe, nondiagnostic |
| 2 Substantial artifact, mildly/moderately impairs diagnosis |
| 3 Some artifact present, does not impair diagnosis |
| 4 No artifact |
| Category 9: Overall quality for diagnosis and treatment planning |
| 1 Nondiagnostic |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 10: Correlation of filling pattern and vessel morphology with treatment images |
| 1 Poor |
| 2 Marginal |
| 3 Good |
| 4 Excellent |
| Category 11: Characterization of malformation pattern (circle one) |
| Flow: high or low |
| Extent: focal or diffuse |
| Additional information provided by late single phase imaging |
| Yes No |