Advertisement

Clinical Neuroradiology

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 97–101 | Cite as

Intranidal Signal Distribution in Post-Contrast Time-of-Flight MRA is Associated with Rupture Risk Factors in Arteriovenous Malformations

  • N. D. ForkertEmail author
  • J. Fiehler
  • M. Schönfeld
  • J. Sedlacik
  • J. Regelsberger
  • H. Handels
  • T. Illies
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate if arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) that are associated with a high rupture risk (HRR) are represented by different intranidal Time-of-Flight (TOF) magnetic resonance angiography intensity distributions compared to those with presumably low rupture risk (LRR).

Methods

Fifty post-contrast TOF datasets of patients with an AVM were analyzed in this study. The patients were classified to the HRR group in case of a deep location, presence of exclusive deep venous drainage, previous hemorrhagic event or a combination thereof. For each TOF dataset, the AVM nidus was semi-automatically delineated and used for histogram extraction. Each histogram was analyzed by calculating the skewness, kurtosis, mean and median intensity and full-width-half-maximum. Statistical analysis was performed using parameter-wise two-sided t-tests of the parameters between the two groups.

Results

Based on morphological analysis, 21 patients were classified to the HRR and 29 patients to the LRR group. Statistical analysis revealed that TOF intensity distributions of HRR AVMs exhibit a significant higher skewness (p = 0.0005) parameter compared to LRR AVMs. Contrary to these findings, no significant differences were found for the other parameters evaluated.

Conclusion

Intranidal flow heterogeneity, for example, caused by turbulent flow conditions, may play an important role for risk of a hemorrhage. An analysis of post-contrast TOF intensities within the nidus of an AVM may offer simple and valuable information for clinical risk estimation of AVMs and needs to be tested prospectively.

Keywords

Intracranial arteriovenous malformations Hemodynamics Cerebral hemorrhage Magnetic resonance angiography 

Notes

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there is no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Stapf C, Mast H, Sciacca RR, Berenstein A, Nelson PK, Gobin YP, et al. The New York Islands AVM Study: design, study progress, and initial results. Stroke. 2003;34(5):e29–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fiehler J, Illies T, Piening M, Saring D, Forkert N, Regelsberger J, et al. Territorial and microvascular perfusion impairment in brain arteriovenous malformations. AJNR Am J. 2009;30(2):356–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stapf C, Mast H, Sciacca RR, Choi JH, Khaw AV, Connolly ES, et al. Predictors of hemorrhage in patients with untreated brain arteriovenous malformation. Neurology. 2006;66(9):1350–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kondziolka D, McLaughlin MR, Kestle JR. Simple risk predictions for arteriovenous malformation hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 1995;37(5):851–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mast H, Young WL, Koennecke HC, Sciacca RR, Osipov A, Pile-Spellman J, et al. Risk of spontaneous haemorrhage after diagnosis of cerebral arteriovenous malformation. Lancet. 1997;350(9084):1065–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kholmovski EG, Alexander AL, Parker DL. Correction of slab boundary artifact using histogram matching. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;15(5):610–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sled JG, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC. A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1998;17(1):87–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Forkert ND, Schmidt-Richberg A, Fiehler J, Illies T, Moller D, Handels H, et al. Fuzzy-based vascular structure enhancement in Time-of-Flight MRA images for improved segmentation. Methods Inf Med. 2011;50(1):74–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Markl M, Chan FP, Alley MT, Wedding KL, Draney MT, Elkins CJ, et al. Time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17(4):499–506.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forkert ND, Fiehler J, Ries T, Illies T, Moller D, Handels H, et al. Reference-based linear curve fitting for bolus arrival time estimation in 4D MRA and MR perfusion-weighted image sequences. Magn Reson Med. 2011;65(1):289–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Forkert ND, Saring D, Fiehler J, Illies T, Moller D, Handels H. Automatic brain segmentation in Time-of-Flight MRA images. Methods Inf Med. 2009;48(5):399–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fiehler J, Stapf C. ARUBA–beating natural history in unruptured brain AVMs by intervention. Neuroradiology. 2008;50(6):465–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. D. Forkert
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Fiehler
    • 2
  • M. Schönfeld
    • 2
  • J. Sedlacik
    • 2
  • J. Regelsberger
    • 3
  • H. Handels
    • 4
  • T. Illies
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computational NeuroscienceUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional NeuroradiologyUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Institute of Medical InformaticsUniversity of LübeckLübeckGermany

Personalised recommendations