Yen-Heng Lin1,2, Yu-Fen Wang1, Hon-Man Liu3,4,5, Chung-Wei Lee1, Ya-Fang Chen1, Hong-Jen Hsieh2. 1. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, Hospital and Medical College, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Department of Medical Imaging, National Taiwan University Hospital, Yun-Lin branch, Douliu City, Taiwan. 3. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, Hospital and Medical College, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 138583@mail.fju.edu.tw. 4. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, Hospital and Medical College, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan. 138583@mail.fju.edu.tw. 5. Department of Medical Imaging, Fu Jen Catholic University Hospital, 69, Guizi Rd., Taishan Dist., New Taipei City, 24352, Taiwan. 138583@mail.fju.edu.tw.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance imaging/angiography (MRI/MRA) are used for the diagnosis of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs). The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CTA and magnetic resonance imaging/angiography (MRI/MRA) for detection of cortical venous reflux (CVR) in intracranial DAVFs. METHODS: The records of patients with angiography-confirmed intracranial DAVFs who also received CTA and MRI/MRA from January 2008 to July 2016 were reviewed. CTA and MRI/MRA were reviewed for signs of CVR, and the diagnostic accuracy of individual signs was evaluated by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total 108 patients were included in this study. CTA signs of CVR included abnormal dilatation, early enhancement, and the presence of a medullary or pial vein. MRI/MRA signs of CVR included abnormal dilatation, early enhancement, flow-related enhancement, flow void, and medullary or pial venous collaterals. The sensitivity of individual CTA signs ranged from 62 to 96%, and specificities from 79 to 94%. The sensitivities of individual MRI/MRA signs ranged from 58 to 83%, and specificities from 77 to 93%. The area under ROC curve (AUC) of CTA and MRI/MRA were 0.91 and 0.87, respectively (P = 0.04 in direct comparison). In subgroup analysis, CTA had better diagnostic accuracy for higher grade disease (P = 0.05) and non-aggressive manifestation (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Both CTA and MRI/MRA have good diagnostic accuracy for detection of CVR in patients with intracranial DAVFs. There is modest evidence that CTA is better than MRI/MRA.
PURPOSE: Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance imaging/angiography (MRI/MRA) are used for the diagnosis of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs). The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CTA and magnetic resonance imaging/angiography (MRI/MRA) for detection of cortical venous reflux (CVR) in intracranial DAVFs. METHODS: The records of patients with angiography-confirmed intracranial DAVFs who also received CTA and MRI/MRA from January 2008 to July 2016 were reviewed. CTA and MRI/MRA were reviewed for signs of CVR, and the diagnostic accuracy of individual signs was evaluated by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total 108 patients were included in this study. CTA signs of CVR included abnormal dilatation, early enhancement, and the presence of a medullary or pial vein. MRI/MRA signs of CVR included abnormal dilatation, early enhancement, flow-related enhancement, flow void, and medullary or pial venous collaterals. The sensitivity of individual CTA signs ranged from 62 to 96%, and specificities from 79 to 94%. The sensitivities of individual MRI/MRA signs ranged from 58 to 83%, and specificities from 77 to 93%. The area under ROC curve (AUC) of CTA and MRI/MRA were 0.91 and 0.87, respectively (P = 0.04 in direct comparison). In subgroup analysis, CTA had better diagnostic accuracy for higher grade disease (P = 0.05) and non-aggressive manifestation (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Both CTA and MRI/MRA have good diagnostic accuracy for detection of CVR in patients with intracranial DAVFs. There is modest evidence that CTA is better than MRI/MRA.
Authors: Shalini A Amukotuwa; Jeremy J Heit; Michael P Marks; Nancy Fischbein; Roland Bammer Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Alfonso Lagares; José María Millán; Ana Ramos; José A F Alén; Jesús Hernández Gallego Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: C Cognard; Y P Gobin; L Pierot; A L Bailly; E Houdart; A Casasco; J Chiras; J J Merland Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mohammed A Azab; Emma R Dioso; Matthew C Findlay; Jayson Nelson; Cameron A Rawanduzy; Philip Johansen; Brandon Lucke-Wold Journal: J Rare Dis Orphan Drugs Date: 2022-06-07