BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with aqueductal stenosis (AS) present with various clinical and radiologic features. Conventional MR imaging provides useful information in AS but depends on a subjective evaluation by the neuroradiologist. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the support of the phase-contrast MR imaging (PC-MR imaging) technique (sensitive to CSF flows) for the diagnosis of AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively considered 17 patients who underwent PC-MR imaging to explore hydrocephalus, with the absence of CSF flow at the aqueductal level. We analyzed their clinical and morphologic MR imaging data. RESULTS: None of the usually reported direct or indirect signs of aqueductal obstruction were seen in 7 patients in whom the clinical suggestion of AS was confirmed by PC-MR imaging results. Seven patients in this population had a third ventriculostomy, and 5 of them were among those in whom conventional MR imaging failed to reveal signs of aqueductal obstruction. All of these 7 patients had a positive postsurgical outcomes. The analysis of CSF and vascular dynamic data in this population was compared with an aged-matched population, and these data were found similar except for the fourth ventricular CSF flush flow latency. CONCLUSIONS: PC-MR imaging supports the diagnosis of CSF flow blockage at the aqueductal level in a reliable, reproducible, and rapid way, which aids in the diagnosis of AS in patients with clinical and/or radiologic suggestion of obstructive hydrocephalus. We, therefore, suggest using this technique in the current evaluation of hydrocephalus.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Patients with aqueductal stenosis (AS) present with various clinical and radiologic features. Conventional MR imaging provides useful information in AS but depends on a subjective evaluation by the neuroradiologist. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the support of the phase-contrast MR imaging (PC-MR imaging) technique (sensitive to CSF flows) for the diagnosis of AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively considered 17 patients who underwent PC-MR imaging to explore hydrocephalus, with the absence of CSF flow at the aqueductal level. We analyzed their clinical and morphologic MR imaging data. RESULTS: None of the usually reported direct or indirect signs of aqueductal obstruction were seen in 7 patients in whom the clinical suggestion of AS was confirmed by PC-MR imaging results. Seven patients in this population had a third ventriculostomy, and 5 of them were among those in whom conventional MR imaging failed to reveal signs of aqueductal obstruction. All of these 7 patients had a positive postsurgical outcomes. The analysis of CSF and vascular dynamic data in this population was compared with an aged-matched population, and these data were found similar except for the fourth ventricular CSF flush flow latency. CONCLUSIONS: PC-MR imaging supports the diagnosis of CSF flow blockage at the aqueductal level in a reliable, reproducible, and rapid way, which aids in the diagnosis of AS in patients with clinical and/or radiologic suggestion of obstructive hydrocephalus. We, therefore, suggest using this technique in the current evaluation of hydrocephalus.