Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Phase-contrast MRI and 3D-CISS versus contrast-enhanced MR cisternography on the evaluation of the aqueductal stenosis

  • Diagnostic Neuroradiology
  • Published:
Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

In the current study, we aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacies of phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (PC-MRI) and three-dimensional constructive interference in steady-state (3D-CISS) sequence over detection of aqueductal stenosis (AS) on the basis of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance cisternography (MRC).

Methods

Twenty-five patients with clinically and radiologically suspected AS were examined by PC-MRI, 3D-CISS, and MRC. Axial–sagittal PC-MRI and sagittal 3D-CISS were applied to view the cerebral aqueduct. Following injection of 0.5–1 ml intrathecal gadolinium diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA) injection, postcontrast MRC images were obtained in three planes in early and late phases. Aqueductal patency was scored as follows: grade 0, normal; grade 1, partial narrowing; and grade 2, complete obstruction. Results of PC-MRI and 3D-CISS were compared with the findings of MRC.

Results

In PC-MRI, seven cases were assessed as grade 0, 16 cases grade 1, and two cases grade 2. As a result of 3D-CISS sequence, eight cases were evaluated as grade 0, 12 cases grade 1, and five cases grade 2. Based on MRC, nine cases were assessed as grade 0, whereas nine and seven cases were evaluated to be grades 1 and 2, respectively. Five cases that demonstrated partial patency in PC-MRI or 3D-CISS showed complete obstruction by MRC.

Conclusion

PC-MRI is helpful in confirming the AS. However, positive flow does not necessarily exclude the existence of AS. 3D-CISS sequence provides excellent cerebrospinal fluid-to-aqueduct contrast, allowing detailed study of the anatomic features of the aqueduct. MRC should be performed on patients who demonstrate suspected AS findings on PC-MRI and/or 3D-CISS sequences.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yadav YR, Mukerji G, Parihar V, Sinha M, Pandey S (2009) Complex hydrocephalus (combination of communicating and obstructive type): an important cause of failed endoscopic third ventriculostomy. BMC Res Notes. doi:10.1186/1756-0500/2/137

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bateman GA (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging quantification of compliance and collateral flow in late-onset idiopathic aqueductal stenosis: venous pathophysiology revisited. J Neurosurg 107:951–958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Allan R, Chaseling R, Graf N, Dexter M (2005) Aqueduct stenosis—benign? J Clin Neurosci 12:178–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tisell M (2005) How should primary aqueductal stenosis in adults be treated?—a review. Acta Neuro Scand 111:143–153

    Google Scholar 

  5. Grossman RI, Yousem DM (2003) Neuroradiology the requisites, 2nd edn. Mosby Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 372–373

    Google Scholar 

  6. El Sankari SS, Lehmann P, Gondry-Jouet C, Fichten A, Godefroy O, Meyer ME, Baledent O (2009) Phase-contrast MR imaging support for the diagnosis of aqueductal stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:209–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Da Silva LRF, Cavalheiro S (2007) Endoscopic aqueductoplasty in the treatment of aqueductal stenosis. Childs Nerv Syst 23:1263–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Atlas SW, Mark AS, Fram EK (1998) Aqueductal stenosis: evaluation with gradient-echo rapid MR imaging. Radiology 169:449–453

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fukuhara T, Luciano MG (2001) Clinical features of late-onset idiopathic aqueductal stenosis. Surg Neurol 55:132–136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Aleman J, Jokura H, Higano S, Akabane A, Shirane R, Yoshimoto T (2001) Value of constructive interference in steady-state, three-dimensional, Fourier transformation magnetic resonance imaging for the neuroendoscopic treatment of hydrocephalus and intracranial cysts. Neurosurgery 48:1291–1295

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schroeder HWS, Schweim C, Schweim KH, Gaab MR (2000) Analysis of aqueductal cerebrospinal fluid flow after endoscopic aqueductoplasty by using cine phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging. Neurosurg Focus 9:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schroeder HWS, Oertel J, Gaab MR (2004) Endoscopic aqueductoplasty in the treatment of aqueductal stenosis. Childs Nerv Syst 20:821–827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Doll A, Christmann D, Kerhli P, Abu Eid M, Gillis C, Bogorin A, Thiebaut A, Dietemann JL (2000) Contribution of 3D-CISS MRI for the post therapeutic monitoring of obstructive hydrocephalus. J Neuroradiol 27:218–225

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Joseph VB, Raghuram L, Korah IP, Chacko AG (2003) MR ventriculography for the study of CSF Flow. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24:373–381

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee HS, Rao KCVG, Zimmerman RA (1999) Cranial MRI and CT, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 173–241

    Google Scholar 

  16. Aydin K, Terzibasioglu E, Sencer S, Sencer A, Suoglu Y, Karasu A, Kiris T, Turantan MI (2008) Localization of cerebrospinal fluid leaks by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance cisternography: a 5-year single-center experience. Neurosurgery 62:584–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Algin O, Hakyemez B, Gokalp KE, Parlak M (2009) Phase-contrast cine MRI versus MR cisternography on the evaluation of the communication between intraventricular arachnoid cysts and neighbouring cerebrospinal fluid spaces. Neuroradiology 51:305–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nilsson S, Ortoft K, Mölstad S (2008) The accuracy of general practitioners' clinical assessment of chest pain patients. Eur J Gen Pract 14:50–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kehler U, Regelsberger J, Gliemroth J, Westphal M (2006) Outcome prediction of third ventriculostomy: a proposed hydrocephalus grading system. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 49:238–243

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kadowaki C, Hara M, Numoto M, Takeuchi K, Saito I (1995) Cine magnetic resonance imaging of aqueductal stenosis. Childs Nerv Syst 11:107–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Drayer BP, Rosenbaum AE, Higman HB (1977) Cerebrospinal fluid imaging using serial metrizamide CT cisternography. Neuroradiology 28:7–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Takahashi M, Arii H, Tamakawa Y (1978) Comparison of metrizamide CT cisternography with radionuclide cisternography in abnormal cerebrospinal fluid dynamics. Neuroradiology 16:199–202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge Gokhan Ocakoglu (biostatistician), Gokhan Gokalp (radiologist), and Ender Korfalı (neurosurgeon) for their suggestions and review of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest statement

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Uludag University Medical Faculty, Gorukle, Bursa, Turkey

    Oktay Algin, Bahattin Hakyemez & Mufit Parlak

Authors
  1. Oktay Algin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bahattin Hakyemez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mufit Parlak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oktay Algin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Algin, O., Hakyemez, B. & Parlak, M. Phase-contrast MRI and 3D-CISS versus contrast-enhanced MR cisternography on the evaluation of the aqueductal stenosis. Neuroradiology 52, 99–108 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0592-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0592-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation