Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 36, Issue 9, pp 940–946

Is there a role for magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of non-traumatic intraparenchymal haemorrhage in children?

  • Andrea C. Y. Liu
  • Nathaniel Segaren
  • Timothy S. C. Cox
  • Richard D. Hayward
  • Wui Khean Chong
  • Vijeya Ganesan
  • Dawn E. Saunders
Original Article

Abstract

Background

In contrast to adults, intraparenchymal haemorrhage (IPH) is at least as common as ischaemic stroke in children. There is often uncertainty about the most appropriate modality for imaging in the acute stage.

Objective

To examine the diagnostic value of MRI and MR angiography (MRA) in the detection of underlying pathology in children with non-traumatic IPH.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review was conducted of children with IPH from January 1997 to March 2003. After exclusion of patients with traumatic IPH or previously diagnosed vascular malformation, aneurysm, or brain tumour, 50 children were identified. Case notes and imaging studies were reviewed.

Results

An underlying lesion was demonstrated with MR in two-thirds of children (25/38) with IPH. A vascular lesion was the commonest cause, followed by tumour. Three children had false-negative MR scans.

Conclusion

MR is a valuable non-invasive imaging modality for detection of both vascular and non-vascular causes of paediatric IPH. The high rate of the latter in childhood makes incorporation of MR into paediatric IPH imaging protocols especially important. Clinical guidelines regarding the optimum sequence of investigations in non-traumatic IPH would be helpful to standardize practice and enable critical appraisal.

Keywords

Brain Haemorrhage MRI Children 

References

  1. 1.
    Broderick J, Talbot GT, Prenger E, et al (1993) Stroke in children within a major metropolitan area: the surprising importance of intracerebral haemorrhage. J Child Neurol 8:250–255PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hayward RD, O’Reilly GV (1976) Intracerebral haemorrhage. Accuracy of computerised transverse axial scanning in predicting underlying aetiology. Lancet 1:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vogl TJ, Balzer JO, Stemmler J, et al (1992) MR angiography in children with cerebrovascular diseases: findings in 31 cases. AJR 159:817–823PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maas K, Barkovich AJ, Dong L, et al (1994) Selected indications for and applications of magnetic resonance angiography in children. Pediatr Neurosurg 20:113–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aoki S, Yoshikawa T, Hori M, et al (2000) MR digital subtraction angiography for the assessment of cranial arteriovenous malformations and fistulas. AJR 175:451–453PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fung E, Ganesan V, Cox TS, et al (2005) Complication rates of diagnostic cerebral angiography in children. Pediatr Radiol 35:1174–1177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fasulakis S, Andronikou S (2003) Comparison of MR angiography and conventional angiography in the investigation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations and aneurysms in children. Pediatr Radiol 33:378–384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oelerich M, Lentschig MG, Zunker P, et al (1998) Intracranial vascular stenosis and occlusion: comparison of 3D time-of-flight and 3D phase-contrast MR angiography. Neuroradiology 40:567–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huston J 3rd, Rufenacht DA, Ehman RL, et al (1991) Intracranial aneurysms and vascular malformations: comparison of time-of-flight and phase-contrast MR angiography. Radiology 181:721–730PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glasier CM, Allison JW (1997) Magnetic resonance angiography in children. Clin Neurosci 4:153–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee BC, Park TS, Kaufman BA (1995) MR angiography in pediatric neurological disorders. Pediatr Radiol 25:409–419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jager HR, Mansmann U, Hausmann O, et al (2000) MRA versus digital subtraction angiography in acute subarachnoid haemorrhage: a blinded multireader study of prospectively recruited patients. Neuroradiology 42:313–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Warren DJ, Hoggard N, Walton L, et al (2001) Cerebral arteriovenous malformations: comparison of novel magnetic resonance angiographic techniques and conventional catheter angiography. Neurosurgery 48:973–982PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    White PM, Teasdale EM, Wardlaw JM, et al (2001) Intracranial aneurysms: CT angiography and MR angiography for detection – prospective blinded comparison in a large patient cohort. Radiology 219:739–749PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tsuchiya K, Katase S, Yoshino A, et al (2000) MR digital subtraction angiography of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. AJNR 21:707–711PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fullerton HJ, Chetkovich DM, Wu YW, et al (2002) Deaths from stroke in US children, 1979 to 1998. Neurology 59:34–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Clin Radiol 58:575–580PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Coley SC, Wild JM, Wilkinson ID, et al (2003) Neurovascular MRI with dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction angiography. Neuroradiology 45:843–850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Griffiths PD, Hoggard N, Warren DJ, et al (2000) Brain arteriovenous malformations: assessment with dynamic MR digital subtraction angiography. AJNR 21:1892–1899PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Golay X, Brown SJ, Itoh R, et al (2001) Time-resolved contrast-enhanced carotid MR angiography using sensitivity encoding (SENSE). AJNR 22:1615–1619PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, et al (1999) SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 42:952–962PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Teksam M, McKinney A, Casey S, et al (2004) Multi-section CT angiography for detection of cerebral aneurysms. AJNR 25:1485–1492PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    White PM, Wardlaw JM, Easton V (2000) Can noninvasive imaging accurately depict intracranial aneurysms? A systematic review. Radiology 217:361–370PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson GB, Steinke DE, Petruk KC, et al (1999) Computed tomographic angiography versus digital subtraction angiography for the diagnosis and early treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery 45:1315–1320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Korogi Y, Takahashi M, Katada K, et al (1999) Intracranial aneurysms: detection with three-dimensional CT angiography with volume rendering – comparison with conventional angiographic and surgical findings. Radiology 211:497–506PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jayaraman MV, Mayo-Smith WW, Tung GA, et al (2004) Detection of intracranial aneurysms: multi-detector row CT angiography compared with DSA. Radiology 230:510–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tipper G, U-King-Im JM, Price SJ, et al (2005) Detection and evaluation of intracranial aneurysms with 16-row multislice CT angiography. Clin Radiol 60:565–572PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Valavanis A (1996) The role of angiography in the evaluation of cerebral vascular malformations. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 6:679–704PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alberico RA, Barnes P, Robertson RL, et al (1999) Helical CT angiography: dynamic cerebrovascular imaging in children. AJNR 20:328–334PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea C. Y. Liu
    • 1
    • 5
  • Nathaniel Segaren
    • 2
  • Timothy S. C. Cox
    • 1
  • Richard D. Hayward
    • 3
  • Wui Khean Chong
    • 1
  • Vijeya Ganesan
    • 4
  • Dawn E. Saunders
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyGreat Ormond Street HospitalLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyGreat Ormond Street HospitalLondonUK
  3. 3.Department of NeurosurgeryGreat Ormond Street HospitalLondonUK
  4. 4.Neurosciences Unit, Institute of Child HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyUniversity Hospital of WalesCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations