Advertisement

Optimization of 3D phase contrast venography for the assessment of the cranio-cervical venous system at 1.5 T

  • Mona Salehi RaveshEmail author
  • Ulf Jensen-Kondering
  • Julia Juhasz
  • Sönke Peters
  • Monika Huhndorf
  • Joachim Graessner
  • Thomas W. D. Möbius
  • Marcus Both
  • Olav Jansen
  • Jan-Bernd Hövener
Diagnostic Neuroradiology

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this work was to optimize a three-dimensional (3D) phase-contrast venography (PCV) product MR pulse sequence in order to obtain clinically reliable images with less artifacts for an improved depiction of the cranio-cervical venous vessels.

Methods

Starting from the product sequence, the 3D PCV protocol was optimized in eight steps with respect to the velocity encoding (Venc) direction and value, slice thickness, reduction of susceptibility artifacts and arterial contamination, gradient mode and radio-frequency (RF)-spoiling, B0-Shimming, asymmetric echo technique and RF-pulse type, and flip angle. The product and optimized protocol was used to perform 3D PCV in 12 healthy male volunteers with a median age of 50 years using a state-of-the-art 1.5-T MR system. For evaluation, the cranio-cervical venous system was divided into 15 segments. These segments were evaluated by three radiologists with experience in neuroradiology. An ordinal scoring system was used to access the overall diagnostic quality, arterial contamination, and the quality of visualization.

Results

Image quality in the optimized 3D PCV was graded as “excellent” by all readers in 65.3% of the cases (p < 0.0001). The visualization of venous segments was strongly improved: it was considered diagnostic in 81.8% of all cases using the optimized sequence and in 47.6% for the product 3D PCV (p < 0.0001), respectively. The optimized protocol improved the imaging of all venous segments (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The optimized 3D PCV pulse sequence showed superior results compared to the product 3D PCV for the visualization and evaluation of the venous system in all healthy volunteers.

Keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Non-contrast-enhanced venography 3D phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (PCV-MRI) Pseudotumor cerebri Cerebral venous thrombosis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the MRI technicians in the Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology for their assistance in MR imaging. We quite warmly thank Dr. Klaus Moldenhauer for his patience, his interest in the science and especially for the fact that he made available himself over the course of several weeks as a volunteer for the optimization of this product 3D PCV.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

JBH was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG; HO 4604/1-1 and HO 4604/2-1), the Cluster of Excellence EXC306 at Kiel University and the Medical Faculty for the Molecular Imaging North Competence Center (MOIN CC) as core facility for imaging. MOIN CC was funded by a grant of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Zukunftsprogramm Wirtschaft of Schleswig-Holstein (Project No. 122-09-053).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

234_2018_2146_MOESM1_ESM.avi (2.3 mb)
ESM 1 (AVI 2311 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Friedman DI, Liu GT, Digre KB (2013) Revised diagnostic criteria for the pseudotumor cerebri syndrome in adults and children. Neurology 81:1159–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wall M (2017) Update on idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurol Clin 35:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baryshnik DB, Farb RI (2004) Changes in the appearance of venous sinuses after treatment of disordered intracranial pressure. Neurology 62:1445–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rohr A, Bindeballe J, Riedel C, van Baalen A, Bartsch T, Doerner L, Jansen O (2012) The entire dural sinus tree is compressed in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a longitudinal, volumetric magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroradiology 54:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bousser M-G, Ferro JM (2007) Cerebral venous thrombosis: an update. Lancet Neurol 6:162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferro JM, Canhao P, Stam J, Bousser M-G, Barinagarrementeria F (2004) Prognosis of cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis: results of the international study on cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis (ISCVT). Stroke 35:664–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee S-K, terBrugge KG (2003) Cerebral venous thrombosis in adults: the role of imaging evaluation and management. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 13:139–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kanda T, Nakai Y, Oba H, Toyoda K, Kitajima K, Furui S (2016) Gadolinium deposition in the brain. Magn Reson Imaging 34:1346–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim M-H, Lee S-Y, Lee S-E, Yang M-S, Jung J-W, Park CM, Lee W, Cho SH, Kang HR (2014) Anaphylaxis to iodinated contrast media: clinical characteristics related with development of anaphylactic shock. PLoS One 9:e100154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ozturk K, Soylu E, Parlak M (2018) Dural venous sinus thrombosis: the combination of noncontrast CT, MRI and PC-MR venography to enhance accuracy. Neuroradiol J 31:473–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ko SB, Kim D-E, Kim SH, Roh J-K (2006) Visualization of venous systems by time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography. J Neuroimaging 16:353–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leach JL, Strub WM, Gaskill-Shipley MF (2007) Cerebral venous thrombus signal intensity and susceptibility effects on gradient recalled-echo MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:940–945PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Axel L, Morton D (1987) MR flow imaging by velocity-compensated/uncompensated difference images. J Comput Assist Tomogr 11:31–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liauw L, van Buchem MA, Spilt A, de Bruine FT, van den Berg R, Hermans J, Wasser MN (2000) MR angiography of the intracranial venous system. Radiology 214:678–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Campeau N, Patton A (2013) Inhance 3D phase contrast angiographic magnetic resonance venography of the brain: initial clinical experience in 23 patients. Proc Int Mag Reson Med 21Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pui MH (2004) Cerebral MR venography. Clin Imaging 28:85–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dumoulin CL, Hart HR Jr (1986) Magnetic resonance angiography in the head and neck. Acta Radiol Suppl 369:17–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hausmann R, Lewin JS, Laub G (1991) Phase-contrast MR angiography with reduced acquisition time: new concepts in sequence design. J Magn Reson Imaging 1:415–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wilen J, Hauksson J, Mild KH (2010) Modification of pulse sequences reduces occupational exposure from MRI switched gradient fields: preliminary results. Bioelectromagnetics 31:85–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tomasian A, Salamon N, Krishnam MS, Finn JP, Villablanca JP (2009) 3D high-spatial-resolution cerebral MR venography at 3T: a contrast-dose-reduction study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:349–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zuehlsdorff S, Giri S, Edelman RR (2017) Shimming method for magnetic resonance imaging (patent number 20170123027). Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. (Malvern, PA, US), NorthShore University, HealthSystem Research Institute (Evanston, IL, US)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McGibney G, Smith MR, Nichols ST, Crawley A (1993) Quantitative evaluation of several partial Fourier reconstruction algorithms used in MRI. Magn Reson Med 30:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nael K, Fenchel M, Salamon N, Duckwiler GR, Laub G, Finn JP, Villablanca JP (2006) Three-dimensional cerebral contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance venography at 3.0 Tesla: initial results using highly accelerated parallel acquisition. Investig Radiol 41:763–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Krayenbühl H, Yasargil MG (1979) Zerebrale Angiographie für Klinik und Praxis: ThiemeGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marasini D, Quatto P, Ripamonti E (2014) Assessing the inter-rater agreement for ordinal data through weighted indexes. Stat Methods Med Res 25:2611–2633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kanda T, Ishii K, Kawaguchi H, Kitajima K, Takenaka D (2014) High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadolinium-based contrast material. Radiology 270:834–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mimura S, Iwata N, Yamane T, Hirata Y, Tanino F, Sugihara S et al (2003) Report on the ECR2003 (European congress of radiology): non-contrast intracranial MR venography with 3D-phase contrast imaging: optimization of presaturation pulse and velocity encoding. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 59:823–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Markl M, Bammer R, Alley MT, Elkins CJ, Draney MT, Barnett A, Moseley ME, Glover GH, Pelc NJ (2003) Generalized reconstruction of phase contrast MRI: analysis and correction of the effect of gradient field distortions. Magn Reson Med 50:791–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Johnson KM, Lum DP, Turski PA, Block WF, Mistretta CA, Wieben O (2008) Improved 3D phase contrast MRI with off-resonance corrected dual echo VIPR. Magn Reson Med 60:1329–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baker MA (2013) Reduction of MRI acoustic noise achieved by manipulation of scan parameters – a study using veterinary MR sequences. Radiography 19:11–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang X, Petersen ET, Ghariq E, de Vis JB, Webb AG, Teeuwisse WM et al (2013) In vivo blood T(1) measurements at 1.5 T, 3 T, and 7 T. Magn Reson Med 70:1082–1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mona Salehi Ravesh
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ulf Jensen-Kondering
    • 2
  • Julia Juhasz
    • 2
  • Sönke Peters
    • 2
  • Monika Huhndorf
    • 2
  • Joachim Graessner
    • 3
  • Thomas W. D. Möbius
    • 4
  • Marcus Both
    • 2
  • Olav Jansen
    • 2
  • Jan-Bernd Hövener
    • 1
  1. 1.Section Biomedical Imaging, Molecular Imaging North Competence Center (MOIN CC), Department for Radiology and NeuroradiologyUniversity Medical CenterKielGermany
  2. 2.Department for Radiology and NeuroradiologyUniversity Hospital Schleswig-HolsteinKielGermany
  3. 3.Siemens Healthcare GmbHHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Institute of Medical Informatics and StatisticsKiel UniversityKielGermany

Personalised recommendations