Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Brain death in children: is computed tomography angiography reliable as an ancillary test?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The diagnosis of brain death is primarily clinical. Sometimes ancillary tests are needed.

Objective

This study compared sensitivity and interobserver agreement of the 10-, 7- and 4-point CT angiography scoring systems for the diagnosis of brain death in children.

Materials and methods

CT angiography examinations of 50 pediatric patients with a clinical diagnosis of brain death were evaluated according to 10-, 7- and 4-point scoring systems. Images were evaluated by two radiologists who considered the vessel opacification first in the arterial phase (A0–V50) and then in the venous phase (A0–V50). We evaluated interobserver agreement for the assessment of vessel opacification and diagnosis of brain death. We compared the differences among brain death diagnoses between children with craniotomy–craniectomy defects, open fontanelles and preserved bone integrity. We subdivided children into two groups according to age: ≤ 2 years and > 2 years. We calculated sensitivities according to age groups.

Results

Using the clinical exam as the reference standard, we found sensitivities for 10-, 7- and 4-point scoring systems to be 70%, 88% and 92% in the A0–V50 method and 40%, 82% and 82% in the A50–V50 method, respectively. Percentage agreement between readers was 78% for the 7-point scale using the A0–V50 method and more than 90% for other scoring systems for both the A0–V50 method and the A50–V50 method. The sensitivity was much lower in children with open anterior fontanelles compared to the groups with preserved bone integrity and with a craniotomy–craniectomy defect.

Conclusion

Just as in adult age groups, in children the 4-point scale appears to be more sensitive than the 10- and 7-point scales for CT angiography-based assessment of brain death. Because the scoring systems have similar sensitivities, they could be used as ancillary tests in pediatric cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rizvi T, Batchala P, Mukherjee S (2018) Brain death: diagnosis and imaging techniques. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 39:515–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Quesnel C, Fulgencio J-P, Adrie C et al (2007) Limitations of computed tomographic angiography in the diagnosis of brain death. Intensive Care Med 33:2129–2135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Marchand AJ, Seguin P, Malledant Y et al (2016) Revised CT angiography venous score with consideration of infratentorial circulation value for diagnosing brain death. Ann Intensive Care 6:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Şahin H, Pekçevik Y (2015) CT angiography as a confirmatory test in diagnosis of brain death: comparison between three scoring systems. Diagn Interv Radiol 21:177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sawicki M, Bohatyrewicz R, Safranow K et al (2014) Computed tomographic angiography criteria in the diagnosis of brain death — comparison of sensitivity and interobserver reliability of different evaluation scales. Neuroradiology 56:609–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gastala J, Fattal D, Kirby PA et al (2019) Brain death: radiologic signs of a non-radiologic diagnosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 185:105465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nakagawa TA, Ashwal S, Mathur M et al (2011) Guidelines for the determination of brain death in infants and children: an update of the 1987 task force recommendations. Crit Care Med 39:2139–2155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Garrett MP, Williamson RW, Bohl MA et al (2018) Computed tomography angiography as a confirmatory test for the diagnosis of brain death. J Neurosurg 128:639–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Henderson N, McDonald MJ (2017) Ancillary studies in evaluating pediatric brain death. J Pediatr Intensive Care 6:234–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Frampas E, Videcoq M, De Kerviler E et al (2009) CT angiography for brain death diagnosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:1566–1570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dupas B, Gayet-Delacroix M, Villers D et al (1998) Diagnosis of brain death using two-phase spiral CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 19:641–647

    Google Scholar 

  12. Combes J-C, Chomel A, Ricolfi F et al (2007) Reliability of computed tomographic angiography in the diagnosis of brain death. Transplant Proc 39:16–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Leclerc X, Taschner C, Vidal A et al (2006) The role of spiral CT for the assessment of the intracranial circulation in suspected brain-death. J Neuroradiol 33:90–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Srairi M, Meluchova Z, Paoletti M et al (2020) Diagnostic accuracy of a revised computed tomography angiography score for brain death confirmation, combining supra-tentorial arteries and infra-tentorial veins. Eur J Radiol 130:109132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Akdogan AI, Pekcevik Y, Sahin H, Pekcevik R (2021) Assessment of cerebral circulatory arrest via CT angiography and CT perfusion in brain death confirmation. Korean J Radiol 22:395–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. No authors listed (1987) Report of special task force. Guidelines for the determination of brain death in children. American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Brain Death in Children. Pediatrics 80:298–300

    Google Scholar 

  17. Berenguer CM, Davis FE, Howington JU (2010) Brain death confirmation: comparison of computed tomographic angiography with nuclear medicine perfusion scan. J Trauma 68:553–559

    Google Scholar 

  18. Brasil S, Bor-Seng-Shu E, de-Lima-Oliveira M et al (2019) Computed tomography angiography accuracy in brain death diagnosis. J Neurosurg 27:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nunes DM, Maia ACM Jr, Boni RC, da Rocha A (2019) Impact of skull defects on the role of CTA for brain death confirmation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 40:1177–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rieke A, Regli B, Mattle HP et al (2011) Computed tomography angiography (CTA) to prove circulatory arrest for the diagnosis of brain death in the context of organ transplantation. Swiss Med Wkly 141:w13261

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sawicki M, Sołek-Pastuszka J, Chamier-Ciemińska K et al (2019) Computed tomography perfusion is a useful adjunct to computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis of brain death. Clin Neuroradiol 29:101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Welschehold S, Kerz T, Boor S et al (2013) Computed tomographic angiography as a useful adjunct in the diagnosis of brain death. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 74:1279–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shankar J, Vandorpe R (2013) CT perfusion for confirmation of brain death. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34:1175–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Welschehold S, Boor S, Reuland K et al (2012) Technical aids in the diagnosis of brain death: a comparison of SEP, AEP, EEG, TCD and CT angiography. Dtsch Arztebl Int 109:624–630

    Google Scholar 

  25. Yuzhong Z, Xuelin Z, Renmin C et al (2003) Diameter measurements of cerebral arteries on three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiograms. Chinese J Radiol 37:394–398

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sawicki M, Bohatyrewicz R, Walecka A et al (2014) CT angiography in the diagnosis of brain death. Pol J Radiol 79:417–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dunn LT (2002) Raised intracranial pressure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:i23–i27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Figaji AA (2017) Anatomical and physiological differences between children and adults relevant to traumatic brain injury and the implications for clinical assessment and care. Front Neurol 8:685

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Eda Almus, Erhan Bıyıklı, Özge Yapıcı & Ferdağ Almus

  2. Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Feyza İnceköy Girgin & Nilüfer Öztürk

Authors
  1. Eda Almus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erhan Bıyıklı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Özge Yapıcı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ferdağ Almus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Feyza İnceköy Girgin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nilüfer Öztürk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eda Almus.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Almus, E., Bıyıklı, E., Yapıcı, Ö. et al. Brain death in children: is computed tomography angiography reliable as an ancillary test?. Pediatr Radiol 53, 131–141 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-022-05419-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-022-05419-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation