[en] Purpose. To compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced (CE) three-dimensional (3D) moving-table magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with that of selective digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for routine clinical investigation in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Methods. Thirty-eight patients underwent CE 3D moving-table MR angiography of the pelvic and peripheral arteries. A commercially available large-field-of-view adapter and a dedicated peripheral vascular phased-array coil were used. MR angiograms were evaluated for grade of arterial stenosis, diagnostic quality, and presence of artifacts. MR imaging results for each patient were compared with those of selective DSA. Results. Two hundred and twenty-six arterial segments in 38 patients were evaluated by both selective DSA and MR angiography. No complications related to MR angiography were observed. There was agreement in stenosis classification in 204 (90.3%) segments; MR angiography overgraded 16 (7%) segments and undergraded 6 (2.7%) segments. Compared with selective DSA, MR angiography provided high sensitivity and specificity and excellent interobserver agreement for detection of severe stenosis (97% and 95%, κ = 0.9 ± 0.03) and moderate stenosis (96.5% and 94.3%, κ = 0.9 ± 0.03). Conclusion. Compared with selective DSA, moving-table MR angiography proved to be an accurate, noninvasive method for evaluation of peripheral arterial occlusive disease and may thus serve as an alternative to DSA in clinical routine