Vitor Mendes Pereira1, Olivier Brina2, Benedicte M A Delattre3, Rafik Ouared2, Pierre Bouillot2, Gorislav Erceg2, Karl Schaller4, Karl-Olof Lovblad2, Maria-Isabel Vargas2. 1. Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 3. Division of Radiology, Department of Medical Imaging, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 4. Division of Neurosurgery, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Flow diverter stents (FDS) have been effectively used for the endovascular treatment of sidewall intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Unlike standard endovascular treatments used to exclude directly the aneurysm bulge from the parent vessel, FDS induce reduction in the intra-aneurysmal flow and promote progressive and stable thrombosis therein. The advent of FDS has therefore increased the need for understanding of IA hemodynamics. METHODS: We proposed the use of the most recently evolved four-dimensional (4D) flow MRI technique to evaluate qualitatively and quantitatively post-FDS flow modification in 10 patients. We report intra-aneurysmal velocity measurements and the influence of metal artifacts induced by the stent. RESULTS: An index was defined to quantitatively measure flow changes-namely, the proportional velocity reduction ratio (PVRR)-with ranges from 34.6% to 71.1%. Furthermore, we could compare streamlines characterizing the post-stent flow patterns in five patients in whom the intra-aneurysmal velocity was beyond the visualization threshold of 7.69 cm/s. CONCLUSIONS: Despite metal artifacts and the low velocities involved, 4D flow MRI could be of interest to measure qualitatively and quantitatively flow changes in stented aneurysms. However, further enhancements are required together with further validation work before it can be considered for clinical use. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
BACKGROUND: Flow diverter stents (FDS) have been effectively used for the endovascular treatment of sidewall intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Unlike standard endovascular treatments used to exclude directly the aneurysm bulge from the parent vessel, FDS induce reduction in the intra-aneurysmal flow and promote progressive and stable thrombosis therein. The advent of FDS has therefore increased the need for understanding of IA hemodynamics. METHODS: We proposed the use of the most recently evolved four-dimensional (4D) flow MRI technique to evaluate qualitatively and quantitatively post-FDS flow modification in 10 patients. We report intra-aneurysmal velocity measurements and the influence of metal artifacts induced by the stent. RESULTS: An index was defined to quantitatively measure flow changes-namely, the proportional velocity reduction ratio (PVRR)-with ranges from 34.6% to 71.1%. Furthermore, we could compare streamlines characterizing the post-stent flow patterns in five patients in whom the intra-aneurysmal velocity was beyond the visualization threshold of 7.69 cm/s. CONCLUSIONS: Despite metal artifacts and the low velocities involved, 4D flow MRI could be of interest to measure qualitatively and quantitatively flow changes in stented aneurysms. However, further enhancements are required together with further validation work before it can be considered for clinical use. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: T Su; P Reymond; O Brina; P Bouillot; P Machi; B M A Delattre; L Jin; K O Lövblad; M I Vargas Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: O Brina; P Bouillot; P Reymond; A S Luthman; C Santarosa; M Fahrat; K O Lovblad; P Machi; B M A Delattre; V M Pereira; M I Vargas Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: P Bouillot; O Brina; H Yilmaz; M Farhat; G Erceg; K-O Lovblad; M I Vargas; Z Kulcsar; V M Pereira Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-06-30 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K Gester; I Lüchtefeld; M Büsen; S J Sonntag; T Linde; U Steinseifer; G Cattaneo Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sergey Sindeev; Philipp Georg Arnold; Sergey Frolov; Sascha Prothmann; Dieter Liepsch; Andrea Balasso; Philipp Berg; Stephan Kaczmarz; Jan Stefan Kirschke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Simin Mahinrad; Can Ozan Tan; Yue Ma; Maria Aristova; Andrew L Milstead; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Susanne Schnell; Michael Markl; Farzaneh A Sorond Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 5.119
Authors: Fawaz Al-Mufti; Eric R Cohen; Krishna Amuluru; Vikas Patel; Mohammad El-Ghanem; Rolla Nuoman; Neil Majmundar; Neha S Dangayach; Philip M Meyers Journal: Interv Neurol Date: 2018-10-16