PDF herunterladen
Semin Neurol 2012; 32(04): 401-410
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1331811
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Vascular Imaging of the Head and Neck

Ashutosh P. Jadhav
1   Department of Neurology and Stroke University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Tudor G. Jovin
1   Department of Neurology and Stroke University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
29. Januar 2013 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Pathologies of the cranial and cervical vasculature are often devastating and require rapid and accurate anatomic delineation. The clinical scenario will often dictate the most appropriate imaging modality warranted. In this review, we will discuss the application of magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), computed tomographic angiography (CTA), and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in the evaluation of cerebrovascular diseases with an emphasis on ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Noninvasive modalities such as MRA and CTA are becoming widely available and increasingly sensitive for most pathologies, but DSA continues to be the gold standard in cases of diagnostic ambiguity and is increasingly utilized with advances in endovascular treatments.

Keywords

stroke - dissection - carotid stenosis - vasculopathy - hemorrhage - aneurysm - arteriovenous malformation - magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) - computed tomographic angiography (CTA) - digital subtraction angiography (DSA)
 

  • References

  • 1 Hopkins LN, Lanzino G, Guterman LR. Treating complex nervous system vascular disorders through a “needle stick”: origins, evolution, and future of neuroendovascular therapy. Neurosurgery 2001; 48 (3) 463-475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Dawkins AA, Evans AL, Wattam J , et al. Complications of cerebral angiography: a prospective analysis of 2,924 consecutive procedures. Neuroradiology 2007; 49 (9) 753-759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Thiex R, Norbash AM, Frerichs KU. The safety of dedicated-team catheter-based diagnostic cerebral angiography in the era of advanced noninvasive imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31 (2) 230-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fifi JT, Meyers PM, Lavine SD , et al. Complications of modern diagnostic cerebral angiography in an academic medical center. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (4) 442-447
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Matsumoto Y, Hongo K, Toriyama T, Nagashima H, Kobayashi S. Transradial approach for diagnostic selective cerebral angiography: results of a consecutive series of 166 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001; 22 (4) 704-708
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Samaniego EA, Dabus G, Raju R, Tsoukas AI, Linfante I. Intracranial Angioplasty and Stenting Through Direct Carotid Puncture. J Neuroimaging 2011; [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mohr JP. Stroke: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier/Saunders; 2011: xxv, 1485
    Google Scholar
  • 8 McVerry F, Liebeskind DS, Muir KW. Systematic review of methods for assessing leptomeningeal collateral flow. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33 (3) 576-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Delgado Almandoz JE, Romero JM, Pomerantz SR, Lev MH. Computed tomography angiography of the carotid and cerebral circulation. Radiol Clin North Am 2010; 48 (2) 265-281 , vii–viii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Thaker NG, Turner JD, Cobb WS , et al. Computed tomographic angiography versus digital subtraction angiography for the postoperative detection of residual aneurysms: a single-institution series and meta-analysis. J Neurointerv Surg 2012; 4 (3) 219-225
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hassan AE, Rostambeigi N, Chaudhry SA , et al. Combination of noninvasive neurovascular imaging modalities in stroke patients: patterns of use and impact on need for digital subtraction angiography. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2012; . [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ozsarlak O, Van Goethem JW, Maes M, Parizel PM. MR angiography of the intracranial vessels: technical aspects and clinical applications. Neuroradiology 2004; 46 (12) 955-972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Wheaton AJ, Miyazaki M. Non-contrast enhanced MR angiography: physical principles. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 36 (2) 286-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Levine GN, Gomes AS, Arai AE , et al; American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization; American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention. Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiovascular devices: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Circulation 2007; 116 (24) 2878-2891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Barazangi N, Wintermark M, Lease K, Rao R, Smith W, Josephson SA. Comparison of computed tomography angiography and transesophageal echocardiography for evaluating aortic arch disease. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2011; 20 (5) 436-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Griffiths GD, Razzaq R, Farrell A, Ashleigh R, Charlesworth D. Variability in measurement of internal carotid artery stenosis by arch angiography and duplex ultrasonography—time for a reappraisal?. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2001; 21 (2) 130-136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zhang Z, Berg M, Ikonen A , et al. Carotid stenosis degree in CT angiography: assessment based on luminal area versus luminal diameter measurements. Eur Radiol 2005; 15 (11) 2359-2365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Debrey SM, Yu H, Lynch JK , et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography for internal carotid artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2008; 39 (8) 2237-2248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Etesami M, Hoi Y, Steinman DA , et al. Comparison of carotid plaque ulcer detection using contrast-enhanced and time-of-flight MRA techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; . [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Prokop M, Shin HO, Schanz A, Schaefer-Prokop CM. Use of maximum intensity projections in CT angiography: a basic review. Radiographics 1997; 17 (2) 433-451
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sheehy N, MacNally S, Smith CS, Boyle G, Madhavan P, Meaney JF. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of subclavian steal syndrome: value of the 2D time-of-flight “localizer” sign. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185 (4) 1069-1073
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Edgell RC, Zaidat OO, Gupta R , et al. Multicenter study of safety in stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery origin stenosis: results from the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology Research Consortium. J Neuroimaging 2011; . [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kumar Dundamadappa Md S, Cauley Md Phd K. Vertebral artery ostial stenosis: prevalence by digital subtraction angiography, MR angiography, and CT angiography. J Neuroimaging 2012; . [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Selim M, Caplan LR. Carotid artery dissection. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 2004; 6 (3) 249-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Provenzale JM, Sarikaya B, Hacein-Bey L, Wintermark M. Causes of misinterpretation of cross-sectional imaging studies for dissection of the craniocervical arteries. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196 (1) 45-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Provenzale JM, Sarikaya B. Comparison of test performance characteristics of MRI, MR angiography, and CT angiography in the diagnosis of carotid and vertebral artery dissection: a review of the medical literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193 (4) 1167-1174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Gelal FM, Kitis O, Calli C, Yunten N, Vidinli BD, Uygur M. Craniocervical artery dissection: diagnosis and follow-up with MR imaging and MR angiography. Med Sci Monit 2004; 10 (10) MT109-MT116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Puetz V, Sylaja PN, Coutts SB , et al. Extent of hypoattenuation on CT angiography source images predicts functional outcome in patients with basilar artery occlusion. Stroke 2008; 39 (9) 2485-2490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hirai T, Korogi Y, Ono K , et al. Prospective evaluation of suspected stenoocclusive disease of the intracranial artery: combined MR angiography and CT angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002; 23 (1) 93-101
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Bash S, Villablanca JP, Jahan R , et al. Intracranial vascular stenosis and occlusive disease: evaluation with CT angiography, MR angiography, and digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005; 26 (5) 1012-1021
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Nguyen-Huynh MN, Wintermark M, English J , et al. How accurate is CT angiography in evaluating intracranial atherosclerotic disease?. Stroke 2008; 39 (4) 1184-1188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Yoon DY, Choi CS, Kim KH, Cho BM. Multidetector-row CT angiography of cerebral vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: comparison of volume-rendered images and digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006; 27 (2) 370-377
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Kumar S, Goddeau Jr RP, Selim MH , et al. Atraumatic convexal subarachnoid hemorrhage: clinical presentation, imaging patterns, and etiologies. Neurology 2010; 74 (11) 893-899
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Romijn M, Gratama van Andel HA, van Walderveen MA , et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CT angiography with matched mask bone elimination for detection of intracranial aneurysms: comparison with digital subtraction angiography and 3D rotational angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008; 29 (1) 134-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 McKinney AM, Palmer CS, Truwit CL, Karagulle A, Teksam M. Detection of aneurysms by 64-section multidetector CT angiography in patients acutely suspected of having an intracranial aneurysm and comparison with digital subtraction and 3D rotational angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008; 29 (3) 594-602
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Agid R, Andersson T, Almqvist H , et al. Negative CT angiography findings in patients with spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage: When is digital subtraction angiography still needed?. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31 (4) 696-705
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Connolly Jr ES, Rabinstein AA, Carhuapoma JR , et al; American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention; Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia; Council on Clinical Cardiology. Guidelines for the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2012; 43 (6) 1711-1737
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Khandelwal N, Agarwal A, Kochhar R , et al. Comparison of CT venography with MR venography in cerebral sinovenous thrombosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187 (6) 1637-1643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Linn J, Michl S, Katja B , et al. Cortical vein thrombosis: the diagnostic value of different imaging modalities. Neuroradiology 2010; 52 (10) 899-911
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Agid R, Shelef I, Scott JN, Farb RI. Imaging of the intracranial venous system. Neurologist 2008; 14 (1) 12-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 White JB, Kaufmann TJ, Kallmes DF. Venous sinus thrombosis: a misdiagnosis using MR angiography. Neurocrit Care 2008; 8 (2) 290-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar