S Omodaka1, H Endo2, K Niizuma3, M Fujimura3, T Inoue4, K Sato5, S-I Sugiyama6, T Tominaga3. 1. From the Departments of Neurosurgery (S.O., H.E.). 2. From the Departments of Neurosurgery (S.O., H.E.) hideendo@gmail.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery (K.N., M.F., T.T.), Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan. 4. Department of Neurosurgery (T.I.), Sendai Medical Center, Sendai, Japan. 5. Neuroendovascular Therapy (K.S.). 6. Neuroanesthesia (S.-i.S.), Kohnan Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The incidence of wall enhancement of cerebral aneurysms on vessel wall MR imaging has been described as higher in ruptured intracranial aneurysms than in unruptured intracranial aneurysms, but the difference in the degree of enhancement between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms is unknown. We compared the degree of enhancement between ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms by using quantitative MR imaging measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed quantitative analyses of circumferential enhancement along the wall of cerebral aneurysms in 28 ruptured and 76 unruptured consecutive cases by using vessel wall MR imaging. A 3D-T1-weighted fast spin-echo sequence was obtained before and after contrast media injection, and the wall enhancement index was calculated. We then compared characteristics between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms. RESULTS: The wall enhancement index was significantly higher in ruptured than in unruptured aneurysms (1.70 ± 1.06 versus 0.89 ± 0.88, respectively; P = .0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis found that the most reliable cutoff value of the wall enhancement index to differentiate ruptured from unruptured aneurysms was 0.53 (sensitivity, 0.96; specificity, 0.47). The wall enhancement index remained significant in the multivariate logistic regression analysis (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Greater circumferential enhancement along the wall of cerebral aneurysms correlates with the ruptured state. A quantitative evaluation of circumferential enhancement by using vessel wall MR imaging could be useful in differentiating ruptured from unruptured intracranial aneurysms.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The incidence of wall enhancement of cerebral aneurysms on vessel wall MR imaging has been described as higher in ruptured intracranial aneurysms than in unruptured intracranial aneurysms, but the difference in the degree of enhancement between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms is unknown. We compared the degree of enhancement between ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms by using quantitative MR imaging measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed quantitative analyses of circumferential enhancement along the wall of cerebral aneurysms in 28 ruptured and 76 unruptured consecutive cases by using vessel wall MR imaging. A 3D-T1-weighted fast spin-echo sequence was obtained before and after contrast media injection, and the wall enhancement index was calculated. We then compared characteristics between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms. RESULTS: The wall enhancement index was significantly higher in ruptured than in unruptured aneurysms (1.70 ± 1.06 versus 0.89 ± 0.88, respectively; P = .0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis found that the most reliable cutoff value of the wall enhancement index to differentiate ruptured from unruptured aneurysms was 0.53 (sensitivity, 0.96; specificity, 0.47). The wall enhancement index remained significant in the multivariate logistic regression analysis (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Greater circumferential enhancement along the wall of cerebral aneurysms correlates with the ruptured state. A quantitative evaluation of circumferential enhancement by using vessel wall MR imaging could be useful in differentiating ruptured from unruptured intracranial aneurysms.
Authors: Timo Krings; Daniel M Mandell; Tim-Rasmus Kiehl; Sasikhan Geibprasert; Michael Tymianski; Hortensia Alvarez; Karel G terBrugge; Franz-Josef Hans Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2011-09-20 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Rachel Kleinloog; Emine Korkmaz; Jaco J M Zwanenburg; Hugo J Kuijf; Fredy Visser; Roos Blankena; Jan A Post; Ynte M Ruigrok; Peter R Luijten; Luca Regli; Gabriel J E Rinkel; Bon H Verweij Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: S Nagahata; M Nagahata; M Obara; R Kondo; N Minagawa; S Sato; S Sato; W Mouri; S Saito; T Kayama Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Jacoba P Greving; Marieke J H Wermer; Robert D Brown; Akio Morita; Seppo Juvela; Masahiro Yonekura; Toshihiro Ishibashi; James C Torner; Takeo Nakayama; Gabriël J E Rinkel; Ale Algra Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Anthony Portanova; Niloofar Hakakian; David J Mikulis; Renu Virmani; Wael M A Abdalla; Bruce A Wasserman Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jorge A Roa; Mario Zanaty; Carlos Osorno-Cruz; Daizo Ishii; Girish Bathla; Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez; David M Hasan; Edgar A Samaniego Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: J W Song; S C Guiry; H Shou; S Wang; W R Witschey; S R Messé; S E Kasner; L A Loevner Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jae W Song; Brianna F Moon; Morgan P Burke; Srikant Kamesh Iyer; Mark A Elliott; Haochang Shou; Steven R Messé; Scott E Kasner; Laurie A Loevner; Mitchell D Schnall; John E Kirsch; Walter R Witschey; Zhaoyang Fan Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Jorge A Roa; Mario Zanaty; Daizo Ishii; Yongjun Lu; David K Kung; Robert M Starke; James C Torner; Pascal M Jabbour; Edgar A Samaniego; David M Hasan Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 5.115