BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Arteriovenous malformations are an important etiology of hemorrhagic stroke. However, current imaging modalities and risk do not provide insights into individual AVM hemodynamics and its role in pathophysiology. The aims of this study are to determine whether intracranial 4D flow MR imaging can provide insights into arteriovenous malformation hemodynamics independent of the Spetzler-Martin grade and to report the changes in flow observed during staged embolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intracranial 3D blood flow was assessed in 20 patients with AVM (age = 39 ± 15 years, Spetzler-Martin grade ranging from 1-4) with the use of 4D flow MR imaging (temporal resolution = 45 ms, spatial resolution = [1.2-1.6mm](3)). AVM hemodynamics were visualized by means of time-integrated 3D pathlines depicting the AVM arterial feeding and venous draining patterns over the cardiac cycle. Analysis included the grading of feeding and draining velocities on a 3-point scale (0 = low <25 cm/s, 1 = medium <50 cm/s, 2 = high >50 cm/s). For 4 of 20 patients undergoing 4D flow MR imaging follow-up after staged embolization, peak velocities were quantified in arterial feeders, draining veins, the sagittal sinus, and contralateral arteries. RESULTS: In 50% of the cases with Spetzler-Martin grade >2, heterogeneous flow (velocity grade differences >1) was found across arteries and veins. Velocities in draining veins increased from Spetzler-Martin grade = 1 (grading = 0.5 ± 0.6) to Spetzler-Martin grade ≥3 (1.1 ± 0.6), whereas arterial velocities were similar (1.7 ± 0.6 versus 1.5 ± 0.6). In the postembolization subgroup of 4 patients, 4D flow MR imaging demonstrated successively more compact AVM and redistribution of velocities. Changes in arterial and venous velocities during treatment were highly different among individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Spetzler-Martin grade does not reflect differences in 3D AVM arterial and venous hemodynamics, and an individual assessment of AVM hemodynamics may be needed for improved lesion characterization. Four-dimensional flow MR imaging may have the potential to monitor and guide embolization treatment planning.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Arteriovenous malformations are an important etiology of hemorrhagic stroke. However, current imaging modalities and risk do not provide insights into individual AVM hemodynamics and its role in pathophysiology. The aims of this study are to determine whether intracranial 4D flow MR imaging can provide insights into arteriovenous malformation hemodynamics independent of the Spetzler-Martin grade and to report the changes in flow observed during staged embolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intracranial 3D blood flow was assessed in 20 patients with AVM (age = 39 ± 15 years, Spetzler-Martin grade ranging from 1-4) with the use of 4D flow MR imaging (temporal resolution = 45 ms, spatial resolution = [1.2-1.6mm](3)). AVM hemodynamics were visualized by means of time-integrated 3D pathlines depicting the AVM arterial feeding and venous draining patterns over the cardiac cycle. Analysis included the grading of feeding and draining velocities on a 3-point scale (0 = low <25 cm/s, 1 = medium <50 cm/s, 2 = high >50 cm/s). For 4 of 20 patients undergoing 4D flow MR imaging follow-up after staged embolization, peak velocities were quantified in arterial feeders, draining veins, the sagittal sinus, and contralateral arteries. RESULTS: In 50% of the cases with Spetzler-Martin grade >2, heterogeneous flow (velocity grade differences >1) was found across arteries and veins. Velocities in draining veins increased from Spetzler-Martin grade = 1 (grading = 0.5 ± 0.6) to Spetzler-Martin grade ≥3 (1.1 ± 0.6), whereas arterial velocities were similar (1.7 ± 0.6 versus 1.5 ± 0.6). In the postembolization subgroup of 4 patients, 4D flow MR imaging demonstrated successively more compact AVM and redistribution of velocities. Changes in arterial and venous velocities during treatment were highly different among individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Spetzler-Martin grade does not reflect differences in 3D AVM arterial and venous hemodynamics, and an individual assessment of AVM hemodynamics may be needed for improved lesion characterization. Four-dimensional flow MR imaging may have the potential to monitor and guide embolization treatment planning.
Authors: C S Ogilvy; P E Stieg; I Awad; R D Brown; D Kondziolka; R Rosenwasser; W L Young; G Hademenos Journal: Stroke Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Francesco Fera; Francesco Bono; Demetrio Messina; Olivier Gallo; Pier Luigi Lanza; William Auteri; Giuseppe Nicoletti; Giuseppe Santoro; Aldo Quattrone Journal: J Neurol Date: 2005-03-07 Impact factor: 4.849
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: Jelena Bock; Alex Frydrychowicz; Aurélien F Stalder; Thorsten A Bley; Hans Burkhardt; Jürgen Hennig; Michael Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Andreas Hartmann; Henning Mast; Jay P Mohr; John Pile-Spellman; E Sander Connolly; Robert R Sciacca; Alexander Khaw; Christian Stapf Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-10-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Florian Schuchardt; Laure Schroeder; Constantin Anastasopoulos; Michael Markl; Jochen Bäuerle; Anja Hennemuth; Johann Drexl; José M Valdueza; Irina Mader; Andreas Harloff Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-02-01 Impact factor: 5.315
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: D L Bell; T M Leslie-Mazwi; A J Yoo; J D Rabinov; W E Butler; J E Bell; J A Hirsch Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jing Liu; Louise Koskas; Farshid Faraji; Evan Kao; Yan Wang; Henrik Haraldsson; Sarah Kefayati; Chengcheng Zhu; Sinyeob Ahn; Gerhard Laub; David Saloner Journal: MAGMA Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 2.310