Evaluation of sporadic intracranial cavernous malformations for detecting associated developmental venous anomalies: added diagnostic value of C-arm contrast-enhanced cone-beam CT to routine contrast-enhanced MRI

被引:4
|
作者
Kocak, Burak [1 ]
Kizilkilic, Osman [2 ]
Zeynalova, Amalya [2 ]
Korkmazer, Bora [3 ]
Kocer, Naci [2 ]
Islak, Civan [2 ]
机构
[1] Istanbul Training & Res Hosp, Dept Radiol, Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Istanbul Univ, Cerrahpasa Med Fac, Dept Radiol, Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Canakkale Mehmet Akif Ersoy State Hosp, Dept Radiol, Canakkale, Turkey
关键词
Cavernous haemangioma; Cone-beam computed tomography; Magnetic resonance imaging; Central nervous system venous angioma; VASCULAR MALFORMATIONS; BRAIN; ANGIOGRAPHY; ANGIOARCHITECTURE; PRINCIPLES; APPEARANCE; DRAINAGE; DISEASE;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-018-5652-3
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
ObjectiveOur purpose was to investigate the added diagnostic value of C-arm contrast-enhanced cone-beam CT (CE-CBCT) to routine contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) in detecting associated developmental venous anomalies (DVAs) in patients with sporadic intracranial cavernous malformations (ICMs).MethodsFifty-six patients (53 with single and three with double ICMs) met the inclusion criteria. All patients had routine CE-MRI scans performed at 1.5 Tesla. The imaging studies (CE-MRI and CE-CBCT) were retrospectively and independently reviewed by two observers, with consensus by a third. Group difference, intra- and interobserver agreement, and diagnostic performance of the modalities in detecting associated DVAs were calculated. Reference standard was CE-MRI.ResultsOn CE-MRI and CE-CBCT, 37 (66%; of 56) and 47 patients (84%; of 56) had associated DVAs, respectively. In 10 patients (52.6%; of CE-MRI negatives [n=19]), CE-CBCT improved the diagnosis. Nine patients (16%; of 56) had no DVA on both imaging techniques. Difference in proportions of associated DVAs on CE-MRI and CE-CBCT was statistically significant, p<0.05. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and area under the curve of CE-CBCT were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 90.5-100%), 47.3% (95% CI: 24.4-71.1%), 1.9 (95%CI: 1.240-2.911), 0.737 (95%CI: 0.602-0.845), respectively. Intraobserver agreement was excellent for CE-MRI, kappa () coefficient =0.960, and CE-CBCT, =0.931. Interobserver agreement was substantial for CE-MRI, =0.803, and excellent for CE-CBCT, =0.810.ConclusionsCE-CBCT is a useful imaging technique especially in patients with negative routine CE-MRI in terms of detecting associated DVAs. In nearly half of these particular patients, it reveals an associated DVA as a new diagnosis.Key Points center dot Although it is known to be the gold standard, some of the DVAs associated with ICMs are underdiagnosed with CE-MRI.center dot In nearly half of the patients with negative routine CE-MRI, CE-CBCT reveals an associated DVA as a new diagnosis.center dot Intra- and interobserver agreement on CE-CBCT is excellent in terms of detecting associated DVAs.
引用
收藏
页码:783 / 791
页数:9
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Evaluation of sporadic intracranial cavernous malformations for detecting associated developmental venous anomalies: added diagnostic value of C-arm contrast-enhanced cone-beam CT to routine contrast-enhanced MRI
    Burak Kocak
    Osman Kizilkilic
    Amalya Zeynalova
    Bora Korkmazer
    Naci Kocer
    Civan Islak
    European Radiology, 2019, 29 : 783 - 791
  • [2] Contrast-Enhanced C-Arm CT Evaluation of Radiofrequency Ablation Lesions in the Left Ventricle
    Girard, Erin E.
    Al-Ahmad, Amin
    Rosenberg, Jarrett
    Luong, Richard
    Moore, Teri
    Lauritsch, Guenter
    Boese, Jan
    Fahrig, Rebecca
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING, 2011, 4 (03) : 259 - 268
  • [3] Contrast-Enhanced Cone-Beam Breast CT: An Analysis of Diagnostic Value in Predicting Breast Lesion With Rim Enhancement Malignancy
    Zhao, Xin
    Yang, Jun
    Zuo, Yang
    Kang, Wei
    Liao, Hai
    Zheng, Zhong-Tao
    Su, Dan-Ke
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [4] Angiography with cone-beam CT versus contrast-enhanced MRI for living donor transplant imaging: Is MRI enough?
    Ali, Hamza
    Weinstein, Jeffrey
    Sarwar, Ammar
    Evenson, Amy
    Raven, Kristin
    Curry, Michael P.
    Ahmed, Muneeb
    CLINICAL ANATOMY, 2024, 37 (02) : 185 - 192
  • [5] Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT (CBBCT): clinical performance compared to mammography and MRI
    Susanne Wienbeck
    Uwe Fischer
    Susanne Luftner-Nagel
    Joachim Lotz
    Johannes Uhlig
    European Radiology, 2018, 28 : 3731 - 3741
  • [6] Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT (CBBCT): clinical performance compared to mammography and MRI
    Wienbeck, Susanne
    Fischer, Uwe
    Luftner-Nagel, Susanne
    Lotz, Joachim
    Uhlig, Johannes
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (09) : 3731 - 3741
  • [7] Quantitative analysis of high-resolution, contrast-enhanced, cone-beam CT for the detection of intracranial in-stent hyperplasia
    Flood, Thomas F.
    van der Bom, Imramsjah M. J.
    Strittmatter, Lara
    Puri, Ajit S.
    Hendricks, Gregory M.
    Wakhloo, Ajay K.
    Gounis, Matthew J.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROINTERVENTIONAL SURGERY, 2015, 7 (02) : 118 - 125
  • [8] Prospective Comparison of MRI and Contrast-Enhanced MDCT for Evaluation of Pediatric Pulmonary Hydatid Disease: Added Diagnostic Value of MRI
    Sodhi, Kushaljit Singh
    Bhatia, Anmol
    Samujh, Ram
    Mathew, Joseph L.
    Lee, Edward Y.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 212 (05) : 982 - 987
  • [9] Comparison of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) and breast MRI
    Ma, Yue
    Liu, Aidi
    Zhang, Yuwei
    Zhu, Yueqiang
    Wang, Yafei
    Zhao, Mengran
    Liang, Zhiran
    Qu, Zhiye
    Yin, Lu
    Lu, Hong
    Ye, Zhaoxiang
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2022, 32 (08) : 5773 - 5782
  • [10] Comparison of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) and breast MRI
    Yue Ma
    Aidi Liu
    Yuwei Zhang
    Yueqiang Zhu
    Yafei Wang
    Mengran Zhao
    Zhiran Liang
    Zhiye Qu
    Lu Yin
    Hong Lu
    Zhaoxiang Ye
    European Radiology, 2022, 32 : 5773 - 5782