Comparative evaluation of dural venous sinuses and cerebral veins using contrast-enhanced spoiled gradient recalled echo and time-of-flight magnetic resonance venography

Öz

Abstract

Background/Aims:In the present study, dural venous sinuses and cerebral veins were examined using 3D SPGR MRV and 2D TOF MRV. These methods were compared in terms of detectability of venous structures and their diameters. 

Methods:A total of 110 patients(66 female and 44 male) who had contrast-enhanced 3D SPGR MRV and 2D TOF MRV examinations using a 1.5 T MRI machine in May 2008-June 2011 period were included in the present study. Diameters of dural venous sinuses and veins were measured at three different planes at a position 1cm distal to the site they drained into, and average values were used. Both MRV methods were compared to reveal whether the diameters calculated were different in age groups and between genders.

Results:SSS, bilateral TS’s, right sigmoid sinus, Galen vein and bilateral ICV’s all could be determined using 3D SPGR MRV. Not all dural venous sinuses and veins other than right sigmoid sinus could be visualized in all patients using 2D TOF MRV.There were significant differences between the two examinations for SSS and ISS, bilateral TS and sigmoid sinuses, SS, bilateral Labbe and ICV and Galen vein diameters(p<0.05) Diameters of dural venous sinuses and cortical veins were generally measured larger by 3D SPGR MRV compared to 2D TOF MRV.

Conclusions:In conclusion, differences could be observed between the two MRV examinations for detectability and diameters of intracranial venous structures. Evaluation of intracranial venous structures should not be carried out using only 2D TOF MRV.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cerebral veins,Contrast-enhanced angiography,Dural venous sinuses,Magnetic resonance venography

Kaynakça

1. 1. Osborn AG. Venous anatomy and occlusions. In: Osborn's brain: imaging, pathology, and anatomy. 1st ed. Manitoba, Canada: Amirsys; 2013. pp. 215.
2. 2. Cure JK, Van Tassel P, Smith MT. Normal and variant anatomy of the dural venous sinuses. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1994;15:499–519
3. 3. Rohr A, Bindeballe J, Riedel C, van Baalen A, Bartsch T, Doerner L, Jansen O. The entire dural sinus tree is compressed in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a longitudinal, volumetric magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroradiology. 2012;54[1]:25-33
4. 4. Beggs CB. Venous hemodynamics in neurological disorders: an analytical review with hydrodynamic analysis. BMC Med. 2013;31[11]:142
5. 5. Widjaja E, Griffiths PD. Intracranial MR venography in children: normal anatomy and variations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:1557–1562
6. 6. Han H, Yao Z, Wang H, Deng X, Yu Fong AH, Zhang M. Dural entrance of the bridging vein into the transverse sinus provides a reliable measure for preoperative planning: an anatomic comparison between cadavers and neuroimages. Neurosurgery. 2008;62[5 Suppl2]:ONS289-95;discussionONS295-6
7. 7. MacDonald ME, Frayne R. Cerebrovascular MRI: a review of state-of-the-art approaches, methods and techniques. NMR Biomed. 2015;28[7]:767-91
8. 8. Paoletti M, Germani G, De Icco R, Asteggiano C, Zamboni P, Bastianello S.Intra- and Extracranial MR Venography: Technical Notes, Clinical Application, and Imaging Development. Behav Neurol. 2016;2016:2694504.

9. 9. Widjaja E, Shroff M, Blaser S, Laughlin S, Raybaud C. 2D time-of-flight MR venography in neonates: anatomy and pitfalls. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27[9]:1913-8.
10. 10. Ayanzen RH, Bird CR, Keller PJ, McCully FJ, Theobald MR, Heiserman JE. Cerebral MR venography: normal anatomy and potential diagnostic pitfalls. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2000;21[1]:74-8.
11. 11. Liang L, Korogi Y, Sugahara T, Onomichi M, Shigematsu Y, Yang D, Kitajima M, Hiai Y, Takahashi M. Evaluation of the intracranial dural sinuses with a 3D contrast-enhanced MP-RAGE sequence: prospective comparison with 2D-TOF MR venography and digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22[3]:481-92.
12. 12. Lee JM, Jung S, Moon KS, Seo JJ, Kim IY, Jung TY, Lee JK, Kang SS.Preoperative evaluation of venous systems with 3-dimensional contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance venography in brain tumors: comparison with time-of-flight magnetic resonance venography and digital subtraction angiography. Surg Neurol. 2005;64[2]:128-33; discussion 133-4.
13. 13. Kiliç T, Ozduman K, Cavdar S, Ozek MM, Pamir MN.The galenic venous system: surgical anatomy and its angiographic and magnetic resonance venographic correlations. Eur J Radiol. 2005;56[2]:212-9.
14. 20. Durgun B, Ilgıt ET, Cizmeli MO, Atasever A.Evaluation by angiography of the lateral dominance of the drainage of the dural venous sinuses. SurgRadiol Anat. 1993;15[2]:125-30.
15. 15. Prada F, Del Bene M, Mauri G, Lamperti M, Vailati D, Richetta C, Saini M, Santuari D, Kalani MYS, DiMeco F. Dynamic assessment of venous anatomy and function in neurosurgery with real-time intraoperative multimodal ultrasound: technical note.Neurosurg Focus. 2018 Jul;45[1]:E6.
16. 16. Rhoton AL Jr. The cerebral veins. Neurosurgery. 2002;51[4 Suppl]:S159-205.
17. 17. Hua J, Liu P, Kim T, Donahue M, Rane S, Chen JJ, Qin Q, Kim SG. MRI techniques to measure arterial and venous cerebral blood volume. Neuroimage. 2018;16. pii: S1053-8119[18]30115-0
18. 18. Saiki K, Tsurumoto T, Okamoto K, Wakebe T. Relation between bilateral differences in internal jugular vein caliber and flow patterns of dural venous sinuses. AnatSci Int. 2013;88[3]:141-50.
19. 23. Kopuz C, Aydin ME, Kale A, Demir MT, Corumlu U, Kaya AH. The termination of superior sagittal sinus and drainage patterns of the lateral, occipital at confluenssinuum in newborns: clinical and embryological implications.SurgRadiol Anat. 2010;32[9]:827-33.
20. 21. Singh M, Nagashima M, Inoue Y. Anatomical variations of occipital bone impressions for dural venous sinuses around the torcularHerophili, with special reference to the consideration of clinical significance. SurgRadiol Anat. 2004;26[6]:480-7.
21. 22. Alper F, Kantarci M, Dane S, Gumustekin K, Onbas O, Durur I. Importance of anatomical asymmetries of transverse sinuses: an MR venographic study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004;18[3]:236-9.
22. 24. Provenzale JM, Kranz PG. Dural sinus thrombosis: sources of error in image interpretation. AJR 2011;196:23–31
23. 25. Sayhan S, Guvencer M, Ozer E, Arda MN.Morphometric evaluation of parasagittal venous anatomy for intracranial approaches: a cadaveric study. Turk Neurosurg. 2012;22[5]:540-6.
24. 26. Gökçe E, Pınarbaşılı T, Acu B, Fırat MM, Erkorkmaz Ü. TorcularHerophili classification and evaluation of dural venous sinus variations using digital subtraction angiography and magnetic resonance venographies. SurgRadiol Anat. 2014;36[6]:527-36