Eunhee Kim1, Jae Hyoung Kim, Byung Se Choi, Cheolkyu Jung, Dong Hoon Lee. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 166 Gumi-ro, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do 463-707, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Both jugular venous reflux (JVR) and cavernous dural arteriovenous fistula (DAVF) manifest as abnormal venous signal intensities on time-of-flight (TOF) MR angiography (MRA). We investigated brain MRI and MRA findings that might differentiate JVR from cavernous DAVF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with abnormal venous signal intensities on TOF MRA in the cavernous sinus and its vicinity were selected from 1508 patients who had undergone TOF MRA over the previous 6 months. For comparison, the examinations of 26 patients with cavernous DAVF who had undergone imaging over the previous 8 years were collected. The following findings were assessed: the side and location of abnormal venous signal intensities on intracranial TOF MRA; the signal intensity of the proximal jugular vein on T2-weighted imaging; whether there was early opacification of the cavernous sinus in the arterial phase of contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA); the side of jugular venous drainage in the arteriovenous phase of CE-MRA; and whether retrograde jugular venous flow was seen on neck TOF MRA. RESULTS: Abnormal venous signal intensities were seen on the left side in 73% of patients with JVR and 58% of patients with cavernous DAVF; involvement of the cavernous sinus was found in 12% of patients with JVR and 100% of patients with cavernous DAVF. Increased signal intensity in the ipsilateral jugular vein on T2-weighted imaging was found in 73% of JVR patients and 4% of cavernous DAVF patients. Early opacification of the cavernous sinus in the arterial phase of CE-MRA, ipsilateral jugular venous drainage in the arteriovenous phase of CE-MRA, and ipsilateral retrograde jugular venous flow on neck TOF MRA were found in 0%, 0%, and 63%, respectively, of JVR patients and in 100%, 100%, and 0%, respectively, of cavernous DAVF patients. CONCLUSION: JVR and cavernous DAVF can be differentiated from one another using MRI and MRA.
OBJECTIVE: Both jugular venous reflux (JVR) and cavernous dural arteriovenous fistula (DAVF) manifest as abnormal venous signal intensities on time-of-flight (TOF) MR angiography (MRA). We investigated brain MRI and MRA findings that might differentiate JVR from cavernous DAVF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with abnormal venous signal intensities on TOF MRA in the cavernous sinus and its vicinity were selected from 1508 patients who had undergone TOF MRA over the previous 6 months. For comparison, the examinations of 26 patients with cavernous DAVF who had undergone imaging over the previous 8 years were collected. The following findings were assessed: the side and location of abnormal venous signal intensities on intracranial TOF MRA; the signal intensity of the proximal jugular vein on T2-weighted imaging; whether there was early opacification of the cavernous sinus in the arterial phase of contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA); the side of jugular venous drainage in the arteriovenous phase of CE-MRA; and whether retrograde jugular venous flow was seen on neck TOF MRA. RESULTS: Abnormal venous signal intensities were seen on the left side in 73% of patients with JVR and 58% of patients with cavernous DAVF; involvement of the cavernous sinus was found in 12% of patients with JVR and 100% of patients with cavernous DAVF. Increased signal intensity in the ipsilateral jugular vein on T2-weighted imaging was found in 73% of JVR patients and 4% of cavernous DAVF patients. Early opacification of the cavernous sinus in the arterial phase of CE-MRA, ipsilateral jugular venous drainage in the arteriovenous phase of CE-MRA, and ipsilateral retrograde jugular venous flow on neck TOF MRA were found in 0%, 0%, and 63%, respectively, of JVR patients and in 100%, 100%, and 0%, respectively, of cavernous DAVF patients. CONCLUSION: JVR and cavernous DAVF can be differentiated from one another using MRI and MRA.
Authors: Daniel D Cummins; Michael T Caton; Vinil Shah; Karl Meisel; Christine Glastonbury; Matthew R Amans Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Adam Nyul-Toth; Gabor A Fulop; Stefano Tarantini; Tamas Kiss; Chetan Ahire; Janet A Faakye; Anna Ungvari; Peter Toth; Attila Toth; Anna Csiszar; Zoltan Ungvari Journal: Geroscience Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 7.581
Authors: M Travis Caton; Andrew L Callen; Alexander Z Copelan; Kazim H Narsinh; Eric R Smith; Matthew R Amans Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 3.959