BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Arteriovenous malformations have a high lifetime risk of hemorrhage; however, treatment carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality, including permanent neurologic sequelae. WSS and other hemodynamic parameters are altered in patients with symptomatic AVMs, and analysis of hemodynamics may have value in stratifying patients into different risk groups. In this study, we examined hemodynamic data from patients with stable symptoms and those who presented with acute symptoms to identify trends which may help in risk stratification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phase-contrast MRA using a radial readout (PC-VIPR) is a fast, high-resolution technique that can acquire whole-brain velocity-encoded angiograms with scan times of approximately 5 minutes. Ten patients with AVMs were scanned using PC-VIPR; velocity, area, flow, and WSS in vessels feeding the AVMs and normal contralateral vessels were calculated using velocity data from the phase-contrast acquisition. RESULTS: Patients with an asymptomatic presentation or mild symptoms (n = 4) had no significant difference in WSS in feeding vessels compared with normal contralateral vessels, whereas patients presenting with hemorrhage, severe headaches/seizures, or focal neurologic deficits (n = 6) had significantly higher WSS in feeding vessels compared with contralateral vessels. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we demonstrate that estimates of WSS and other hemodynamic parameters can be obtained noninvasively in patients with AVMs in clinically useful imaging times. Variation in WSS between feeders and normal vessels appears to relate to the clinical presentation of the patient. Further analysis of hemodynamic changes may improve characterization and staging of AVM patients, when combined with existing risk factors.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Arteriovenous malformations have a high lifetime risk of hemorrhage; however, treatment carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality, including permanent neurologic sequelae. WSS and other hemodynamic parameters are altered in patients with symptomatic AVMs, and analysis of hemodynamics may have value in stratifying patients into different risk groups. In this study, we examined hemodynamic data from patients with stable symptoms and those who presented with acute symptoms to identify trends which may help in risk stratification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phase-contrast MRA using a radial readout (PC-VIPR) is a fast, high-resolution technique that can acquire whole-brain velocity-encoded angiograms with scan times of approximately 5 minutes. Ten patients with AVMs were scanned using PC-VIPR; velocity, area, flow, and WSS in vessels feeding the AVMs and normal contralateral vessels were calculated using velocity data from the phase-contrast acquisition. RESULTS:Patients with an asymptomatic presentation or mild symptoms (n = 4) had no significant difference in WSS in feeding vessels compared with normal contralateral vessels, whereas patients presenting with hemorrhage, severe headaches/seizures, or focal neurologic deficits (n = 6) had significantly higher WSS in feeding vessels compared with contralateral vessels. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we demonstrate that estimates of WSS and other hemodynamic parameters can be obtained noninvasively in patients with AVMs in clinically useful imaging times. Variation in WSS between feeders and normal vessels appears to relate to the clinical presentation of the patient. Further analysis of hemodynamic changes may improve characterization and staging of AVMpatients, when combined with existing risk factors.
Authors: S Wetzel; S Meckel; A Frydrychowicz; L Bonati; E-W Radue; K Scheffler; J Hennig; M Markl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yongmei Chen; Ludmila Pawlikowska; Jianhua S Yao; Fanxia Shen; Wenwu Zhai; Achal S Achrol; Michael T Lawton; Pui-Yan Kwok; Guo-Yuan Yang; William L Young Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: J P Mohr; Alan J Moskowitz; Christian Stapf; Andreas Hartmann; Karen Lord; Steven M Marshall; Henning Mast; Ellen Moquete; Claudia Scala Moy; Michael Parides; John Pile-Spellman; Rustam Al-Shahi Salman; Alan Weinberg; William L Young; Alejandrina Estevez; Inam Kureshi; Jonathan L Brisman Journal: Stroke Date: 2010-07-15 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jane Skjøth-Rasmussen; Henrik Roed; Lars Ohlhues; Bo Jespersen; Marianne Juhler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-09-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: C Wu; S A Ansari; A R Honarmand; P Vakil; M C Hurley; B R Bendok; J Carr; T J Carroll; M Markl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Stephan Meckel; Lorenz Leitner; Leo H Bonati; Francesco Santini; Tilman Schubert; Aurelien F Stalder; Philippe Lyrer; Michael Markl; Stephan G Wetzel Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Ramona Lorenz; Jelena Bock; Jeff Snyder; Jan G Korvink; Bernd A Jung; Michael Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: D F Vollherbst; C M Sommer; C Ulfert; J Pfaff; M Bendszus; M A Möhlenbruch Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 3.825