In Vivo Assessment of the Impact of Regional Intracranial Atherosclerotic Lesions on Brain Arterial 3D Hemodynamics

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Arenillas JF

   . Intracranial atherosclerosis: current concepts. Stroke 2011;42:S20–23 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.597278 pmid:21164126

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. Jeng JS,
   3. Tang SC,
   4. Liu HM

   . Epidemiology, diagnosis and management of intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2010;8:1423–32 doi:10.1586/erc.10.129 pmid:20936929

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Chimowitz MI,
   3. Lynn MJ,
   4. Derdeyn CP, et al

   ; SAMMPRIS Trial Investigators. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med 2011;365:993–1003 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1105335 pmid:21899409

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Prabhakaran S,
   3. Warrior L,
   4. Wells KR, et al

   . The utility of quantitative magnetic resonance angiography in the assessment of intracranial in-stent stenosis. Stroke 2009;40:991–93 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.522391 pmid:19164797

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   2. Prabhakaran S,
   3. Wells KR,
   4. Jhaveri MD, et al

   . Hemodynamic changes following Wingspan stent placement–a quantitative magnetic resonance angiography study. J Neuroimaging 2011;21:e109–13 doi:10.1111/j.1552-6569.2009.00425.x pmid:19732297

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Amin-Hanjani S,
   3. Alaraj A,
   4. Calderon-Arnulphi M, et al

   . Detection of intracranial in-stent restenosis using quantitative magnetic resonance angiography. Stroke 2010;41:2534–38 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.594739 pmid:20930155

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Amin-Hanjani S,
   3. Rose-Finnell L,
   4. Richardson D, et al

   ; VERiTAS Study Group. Vertebrobasilar Flow Evaluation and Risk of Transient Ischaemic Attack and Stroke study (VERiTAS): rationale and design. Int J Stroke 2010;5:499–505 doi:10.1111/j.1747-4949.2010.00528.x pmid:21050408

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Baumgartner RW,
   3. Mattle HP,
   4. Schroth G

   . Assessment of ≥50% and <50% intracranial stenoses by transcranial color-coded duplex sonography. Stroke 1999;30:87–92 doi:10.1161/01.STR.30.1.87 pmid:9880394

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Wang L,
   3. Xing Y,
   4. Li Y, et al

   . Evaluation of flow velocity in unilateral middle cerebral artery stenosis by transcranial Doppler. Cell Biochem Biophys 2014;70:823–30 doi:10.1007/s12013-014-9986-4 pmid:24833432

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Bammer R,
    3. Hope TA,
    4. Aksoy M, et al

    . Time-resolved 3D quantitative flow MRI of the major intracranial vessels: initial experience and comparative evaluation at 1.5T and 3.0T in combination with parallel imaging. Magn Reson Med 2007;57:127–40 doi:10.1002/mrm.21109 pmid:17195166

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Markl M,
    3. Frydrychowicz A,
    4. Kozerke S, et al

    . 4D flow MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:1015–36 doi:10.1002/jmri.23632 pmid:23090914

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Wu C,
    3. Honarmand AR,
    4. Schnell S, et al

    . Age-related changes of normal cerebral and cardiac blood flow in children and adults aged 7 months to 61 years. J Am Heart 2016;5:pii: e002657 doi:10.1161/JAHA.115.002657 pmid:26727967

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    2. Ansari SA,
    3. Schnell S,
    4. Carroll T, et al

    . Intracranial 4D flow MRI: toward individualized assessment of arteriovenous malformation hemodynamics and treatment-induced changes. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1922–28 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3537 pmid:23639564

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    2. Schnell S,
    3. Ansari SA,
    4. Vakil P, et al

    . Three-dimensional hemodynamics in intracranial aneurysms: influence of size and morphology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39:120–31 doi:10.1002/jmri.24110 pmid:24151067

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Wu C,
    3. Ansari SA,
    4. Honarmand AR, et al

    . Evaluation of 4D vascular flow and tissue perfusion in cerebral arteriovenous malformations: influence of Spetzler-Martin grade, clinical presentation, and AVM risk factors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1142–49 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4259 pmid:25721076

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Wu C,
    3. Schnell S,
    4. Markl M, et al

    . Combined DSA and 4D flow demonstrate overt alterations of vascular geometry and hemodynamics in an unusually complex cerebral AVM. Clin Neuroradiol 2015 Oct 16. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1007/s00062-015-0477-9 pmid:26475127

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Wu C,
    3. Schoeneman SE,
    4. Kuhn R, et al

    . Complex alterations of intracranial 4D hemodynamics in vein of Galen aneurysmal malformations during staged endovascular embolization. Operative Neurosurg 2016;12:239–49 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001137

    CrossRef
18. 18.↵
    2. Nguyen-Huynh MN,
    3. Wintermark M,
    4. English J, et al

    . How accurate is CT angiography in evaluating intracranial atherosclerotic disease? Stroke 2008;39:1184–88 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.502906 pmid:18292376

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. Choi CG,
    3. Lee DH,
    4. Lee JH, et al

    . Detection of intracranial atherosclerotic steno-occlusive disease with 3D time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography with sensitivity encoding at 3T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:439–46 pmid:17353309

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Debrey SM,
    3. Yu H,
    4. Lynch JK, et al

    . Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography for internal carotid artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2008;39:2237–48 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.509877 pmid:18556586

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Bock J,
    3. Kreher BW,
    4. Hennig J, et al

    . Optimized pre-processing of time-resolved 2D and 3D phase contrast MRI data. In: Proceedings of the Scientific Meeting and Exhibition of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Berlin, Germany. May 19–25, 2007:3138
22. 22.↵
    2. Bakker SL,
    3. de Leeuw FE,
    4. den Heijer T, et al

    . Cerebral haemodynamics in the elderly: the Rotterdam Study. Neuroepidemiology 2004;23:178–84 doi:10.1159/000078503 pmid:15272220

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    2. Akins PT,
    3. Pilgram TK,
    4. Cross DT 3rd., et al

    . Natural history of stenosis from intracranial atherosclerosis by serial angiography. Stroke 1998;29:433–38 doi:10.1161/01.STR.29.2.433 pmid:9472886

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    2. Khan M,
    3. Naqvi I,
    4. Bansari A, et al

    . Intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Stroke Res Treat 2011;2011:282845 doi:10.4061/2011/282845 pmid:21772967

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Amin-Hanjani S,
    3. Du XJ,
    4. Zhao MD, et al

    . Use of quantitative magnetic resonance angiography to stratify stroke risk in symptomatic vertebrobasilar disease. Stroke 2005;36:1140–45 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000166195.63276.7c pmid:15890993

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Mizuma A,
    3. Ishikawa T,
    4. Kajihara N, et al

    . Dynamic cross-sectional changes of the middle cerebral artery in atherosclerotic stenosis detected by 3.0-Tesla MRI. Neurol Res 2014;36:795–99 doi:10.1179/1743132813Y.0000000309 pmid:24649808

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Zhao L,
    3. Barlinn K,
    4. Sharma VK, et al

    . Velocity criteria for intracranial stenosis revisited: an international multicenter study of transcranial Doppler and digital subtraction angiography. Stroke 2011;42:3429–34 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.621235 pmid:21960567

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    2. Hope TA,
    3. Hope MD,
    4. Purcell DD, et al

    . Evaluation of intracranial stenoses and aneurysms with accelerated 4D flow. Magn Reson Imaging 2010;28:41–46 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2009.05.042 pmid:19577400

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Ruland S,
    3. Ahmed A,
    4. Thomas K, et al

    . Leptomeningeal collateral volume flow assessed by quantitative magnetic resonance angiography in large-vessel cerebrovascular disease. J Neuroimaging 2009;19:27–30 doi:10.1111/j.1552-6569.2008.00249.x pmid:18422515

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    2. van Everdingen KJ,
    3. Kappelle LJ,
    4. Klijn CJ, et al

    . Clinical features associated with internal carotid artery occlusion do not correlate with MRA cerebropetal flow measurements. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001;70:333–39 doi:10.1136/jnnp.70.3.333 pmid:11181854

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    2. Sorteberg W,
    3. Langmoen IA,
    4. Lindegaard KF, et al

    . Side-to-side differences and day-to-day variations of transcranial Doppler parameters in normal subjects. J Ultrasound Med 1990;9:403–09 pmid:2197422

    Abstract
32. 32.↵
    2. Obata T,
    3. Shishido F,
    4. Koga M, et al

    . Three-vessel study of cerebral blood flow using phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging: effect of physical characteristics. Magn Reson Imaging 1996;14:1143–48 doi:10.1016/S0730-725X(96)00228-7 pmid:9065904

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    2. Brint SU,
    3. Al-Khalidi HR,
    4. Vatel B, et al

    . MCA flow asymmetry is a marker for cerebrovascular disease. Neurol Res 1996;18:163–67 doi:10.1080/01616412.1996.11740396 pmid:9162872

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Liebeskind DS,
    3. Cotsonis GA,
    4. Saver JL, et al

    ; Warfarin–Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) Investigators. Collateral circulation in symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011;31:1293–301 doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2010.224 pmid:21157476

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    2. Zanette EM,
    3. Fieschi C,
    4. Bozzao L, et al

    . Comparison of cerebral angiography and transcranial Doppler sonography in acute stroke. Stroke 1989;20:899–903 doi:10.1161/01.STR.20.7.899 pmid:2665206

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    2. Brozici M,
    3. van der Zwan A,
    4. Hillen B

    . Anatomy and functionality of leptomeningeal anastomoses: a review. Stroke 2003;34:2750–62 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000095791.85737.65 pmid:14576375

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
37. 37.↵
    2. Brass LM,
    3. Duterte DL,
    4. Mohr JP

    . Anterior cerebral artery velocity changes in disease of the middle cerebral artery stem. Stroke 1989;20:1737–40 doi:10.1161/01.STR.20.12.1737 pmid:2688197

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    2. Uemura A,
    3. O'Uchi T,
    4. Kikuchi Y, et al

    . Prominent laterality of the posterior cerebral artery at three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography in M1-segment middle cerebral artery occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:88–91 pmid:14729535

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
39. 39.↵
    2. Strecker C,
    3. Harloff A,
    4. Wallis W, et al

    . Flow-sensitive 4D MRI of the thoracic aorta: comparison of image quality, quantitative flow, and wall parameters at 1.5 T and 3 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:1097–103 doi:10.1002/jmri.23735 pmid:22745007

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    2. Gu T,
    3. Korosec FR,
    4. Block WF, et al

    . PC VIPR: a high-speed 3D phase-contrast method for flow quantification and high-resolution angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:743–49 pmid:15814915

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
41. 41.↵
    2. Basha TA,
    3. Akçakaya M,
    4. Goddu B, et al

    . Accelerated three-dimensional cine phase contrast imaging using randomly undersampled echo planar imaging with compressed sensing reconstruction. NMR Biomed 2015;28:30–39 doi:10.1002/nbm.3225 pmid:25323208

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    2. Dyvorne H,
    3. Knight-Greenfield A,
    4. Jajamovich G, et al

    . Abdominal 4D flow MR imaging in a breath hold: combination of spiral sampling and dynamic compressed sensing for highly accelerated acquisition. Radiology 2015;275:245–54 doi:10.1148/radiol.14140973 pmid:25325326

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    2. Ha H,
    3. Kim GB,
    4. Kweon J, et al

    . Multi-VENC acquisition of four-dimensional phase-contrast MRI to improve precision of velocity field measurement. Magn Reson Med 2016;75:1909–19 doi:10.1002/mrm.25715 pmid:26059014

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    2. Schnell S,
    3. Rose MJ,
    4. Wu C, et al

    . Improved assessment of aortic hemodynamics by k-t accelerated dual-VENC 4D flow MRI in pediatric patients. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2016;18(suppl):O96 doi:10.1186/1532-429X-18-S1-O96

    CrossRef
45. 45.↵
    2. Kadbi M,
    3. Negahdar M,
    4. Cha JW, et al

    . 4D UTE flow: a phase-contrast MRI technique for assessment and visualization of stenotic flows. Magn Reson Med 2015;73:939–50 doi:10.1002/mrm.25188 pmid:24604617

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    2. O'Brien KR,
    3. Myerson SG,
    4. Cowan BR, et al

    . Phase contrast ultrashort TE: a more reliable technique for measurement of high-velocity turbulent stenotic jets. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:626–36 doi:10.1002/mrm.22051 pmid:19488986

    CrossRefPubMed
47. 47.↵
    2. Petersson S,
    3. Dyverfeldt P,
    4. Sigfridsson A, et al

    . Quantification of turbulence and velocity in stenotic flow using spiral three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI. Magn Reson Med 2016;75:1249–55 doi:10.1002/mrm.25698 pmid:25846511

    CrossRefPubMed