Advertisement

Neuroradiology

, Volume 55, Issue 8, pp 941–945 | Cite as

Noncontrast computed tomographic Hounsfield unit evaluation of cerebral venous thrombosis: a quantitative evaluation

  • David A. BesachioEmail author
  • Edward P. QuigleyIII
  • Lubdha M. Shah
  • Karen L. Salzman
Diagnostic Neuroradiology

Abstract

Introduction

Our objective is to determine the utility of noncontrast Hounsfield unit values, Hounsfield unit values corrected for the patient’s hematocrit, and venoarterial Hounsfield unit difference measurements in the identification of intracranial venous thrombosis on noncontrast head computed tomography.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed noncontrast head computed tomography exams performed in both normal patients and those with cerebral venous thrombosis, acquiring Hounsfield unit values in normal and thrombosed cerebral venous structures. Also, we acquired Hounsfield unit values in the internal carotid artery for comparison to thrombosed and nonthrombosed venous structures and compared the venous Hounsfield unit values to the patient’s hematocrit.

Results

A significant difference is identified between Hounsfield unit values in thrombosed and nonthrombosed venous structures. Applying Hounsfield unit threshold values of greater than 65, a Hounsfield unit to hematocrit ratio of greater than 1.7, and venoarterial difference values greater than 15 alone and in combination, the majority of cases of venous thrombosis are identifiable on noncontrast head computed tomography.

Conclusion

Absolute Hounsfield unit values, Hounsfield unit to hematocrit ratios, and venoarterial Hounsfield unit value differences are a useful adjunct in noncontrast head computed tomographic evaluation of cerebral venous thrombosis.

Keywords

Computed tomography Cerebral sinovenous thrombosis Hounsfield unit Hematocrit Venoarterial difference 

Notes

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Coutinho JM, Zuurbier SM, Aramideh M, Stam J (2012) The incidence of cerebral venous thrombosis: a cross-sectional study. Stroke 43(12):3375–3377. http://stroke.ahajournal.org/content/early/2012/09/20/STROKEAHA.112.671453.long. Accessed 05 Nov 2012Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferro JM, Lopes MG, Rosas MJ et al (2005) Delay in hospital admission of patients with cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis. Cerebrovasc Dis 19:152–155PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ferro JM, Canhao P, Stam J et al (2004) Prognosis of cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis: results of the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT). Stroke 35(3):664–670PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Brujin SF, Stam J, Kappelle LJ, De Brujin SF, Stam J, Kappelle LJ (1996) Thunderclap headache as first symptom of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. CVST Study Group. Lancet 348(9042):1623–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferro JM, Canhao P, Bousser MG et al (2005) Cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis in the elderly. Stroke 3(9):1927–1932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Linn J, Pfefferkorn T, Ivanicova K et al (2009) Noncontrast CT in deep cerebral venous thrombosis and sinus thrombosis: comparison of its diagnostic value for both entities. Am J Neuroradiol 30:728–735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rizzo L, Crasto SG, Ruda R et al (2010) Cerebral venous thrombosis: role of CT, MRI and MRA in the emergency setting. Radiol Med 115(2):313–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tang PH, Chai J, Chan YH et al (2008) Superior sagittal sinus thrombosis: subtle signs on neuroimaging. Ann Acad Med Singapore 37:397–401PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buyck PJ, De Keyzer F, Vanneste D, Wilms G, Thils V, Demaerel P (2013) CT density measurement and H:H ratio are useful in diagnosing acute cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Am J Neuroradiol. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3469
  10. 10.
    Black DF, Rad AE, Gray LA et al (2011) Cerebral venous sinus density on noncontrast CT correlates with hematocrit. Am J Neuroradiol 32:1354–1357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fanous R, Leung L, Karlik S (2010) Quantitative assessment of the superior sagittal sinus on unenhanced computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 75:336–342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saposnik G, Barinagarrementeria F, Brown RD et al (2011) Diagnosis and management of cerebral venous thrombosis: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 42:1158–1192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kozic D, Zarkov M, Semnic RR et al (2010) Overlooked early CT signs of cerebral venous thrombosis with lethal outcome. Acta Neurol Belg 110(4):345–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Provenzale JM, Kranz PG (2011) Dural sinus thrombosis: sources of error in image interpretation. Am J Roentgenol 196:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roland T, Jacobs J, Rappaport A et al (2010) Unenhanced brain CT is useful to decide on further imaging in suspected venous sinus thrombosis. Clin Radiol 65:34–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kamal MK (2006) Computed tomographic imaging of cerebral venous thrombosis. J Pak Med Assoc 56(11):519–522PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag (outside the USA) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David A. Besachio
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Edward P. QuigleyIII
    • 1
  • Lubdha M. Shah
    • 1
  • Karen L. Salzman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.United States NavyBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations