Regarding the use of MRA for evaluation of lower extremity arteries, which statement is FALSE?

MRA (Magnetic Resonance Angiography) is a non-invasive imaging technique that provides valuable information about blood vessels, including those in the lower extremities. When considering the statements regarding MRA, the assertion that MRA can't achieve the accuracy of conventional angiography is false because MRA has been shown to provide comparable, and in some instances superior, visualization of vascular anatomy without the need for ionizing radiation or contrast agents that can have side effects.

In addition, MRA does present certain advantages over conventional angiography. It is indeed more sensitive in identifying patent runoff arteries, allowing clinicians to better assess vascular flow and the presence of blockages beyond the main arterial sites. Moreover, it can be a suitable standalone diagnostic tool prior to surgical interventions such as bypass surgery, offering critical information about vascular anatomy and pathology without the invasiveness associated with conventional techniques. Lastly, MRA is designed to entail fewer potential side effects, such as those associated with contrast-induced nephropathy seen in conventional angiography, making MRA a safer alternative for patients at risk for kidney issues.

Therefore, the assertion that MRA can't achieve the accuracy of conventional angiography is indeed the misleading statement among the provided options.