open access

Vol 81, No 2 (2022)
Original article
Submitted: 2021-01-05
Accepted: 2021-02-05
Published online: 2021-03-01
Get Citation

The evaluation of cerebral venous normal anatomy and variations by phase-contrast cranial magnetic resonance venography

E. Doğan1, M. Apaydın2
DOI: 10.5603/FM.a2021.0027
·
Pubmed: 33749805
·
Folia Morphol 2022;81(2):314-323.
Affiliations
  1. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mugla Sıtkı Koçman University, Mentese, Mugla, Turkey
  2. Department of Radiology, İzmir Atatürk Education and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkey

open access

Vol 81, No 2 (2022)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Submitted: 2021-01-05
Accepted: 2021-02-05
Published online: 2021-03-01

Abstract

Background: The aim of our study was to determine the ability of the phase-contrast-cranial magnetic resonance venography (PC-CMRV) technique to detect cranial anatomy, variations, thrombosis, to reveal the deficits of the technique and to discuss the reasons for these deficits on a physics basis.
Materials and methods: Phase-contrast’s detection rates of anatomic variations and physiological filling defects (FDs) were evaluated in 136 patients and compared with the time-of-flight technique magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cadaveric studies.
Results: The dominance correlation between the three evaluated sinuses (transverse sinus [TS], sigmoid sinus, jugular vein) which originated from different embryological buds was statistically significant and the right vessel chain was dominant. PC is inadequate to show some vessels like inferior sagittal sinus (anatomically, this vessel is approximately present in 100% of the cases, but it was only visualised in 41.2% of the patients in PC-MRI). Visualisation of major veins was sufficient. PC-MRI created physiological FDs in 27.2% (72.3% middle, 10.3% inner, 17% outer part) of the patients. The FDs were concentrated in the middle part and not observed in the dominant sinus.
Conclusions: The defects of visualisation are present due to the PC’s technique. It can be misdiagnosed as agenesis or thrombosis. PC creates a high incidence of physiologic FDs in TS. The results are not reliable, especially if FDs are in the middle part or non-dominant side.

Abstract

Background: The aim of our study was to determine the ability of the phase-contrast-cranial magnetic resonance venography (PC-CMRV) technique to detect cranial anatomy, variations, thrombosis, to reveal the deficits of the technique and to discuss the reasons for these deficits on a physics basis.
Materials and methods: Phase-contrast’s detection rates of anatomic variations and physiological filling defects (FDs) were evaluated in 136 patients and compared with the time-of-flight technique magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cadaveric studies.
Results: The dominance correlation between the three evaluated sinuses (transverse sinus [TS], sigmoid sinus, jugular vein) which originated from different embryological buds was statistically significant and the right vessel chain was dominant. PC is inadequate to show some vessels like inferior sagittal sinus (anatomically, this vessel is approximately present in 100% of the cases, but it was only visualised in 41.2% of the patients in PC-MRI). Visualisation of major veins was sufficient. PC-MRI created physiological FDs in 27.2% (72.3% middle, 10.3% inner, 17% outer part) of the patients. The FDs were concentrated in the middle part and not observed in the dominant sinus.
Conclusions: The defects of visualisation are present due to the PC’s technique. It can be misdiagnosed as agenesis or thrombosis. PC creates a high incidence of physiologic FDs in TS. The results are not reliable, especially if FDs are in the middle part or non-dominant side.

Get Citation

Keywords

magnetic resonance, venography, dural sinuses, phase contrast, arachnoid granulations

About this article
Title

The evaluation of cerebral venous normal anatomy and variations by phase-contrast cranial magnetic resonance venography

Journal

Folia Morphologica

Issue

Vol 81, No 2 (2022)

Article type

Original article

Pages

314-323

Published online

2021-03-01

Page views

1509

Article views/downloads

638

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2021.0027

Pubmed

33749805

Bibliographic record

Folia Morphol 2022;81(2):314-323.

Keywords

magnetic resonance
venography
dural sinuses
phase contrast
arachnoid granulations

Authors

E. Doğan
M. Apaydın

References (29)
  1. Ahmed MS, Imtiaz S, Shazlee MK, et al. Normal variations in cerebral venous anatomy and their potential pitfalls on 2D TOF MRV examination: Results from a private tertiary care hospital in Karachi. J Pak Med Assoc. 2018; 68(7): 1009–1013.
  2. Alper F, Kantarci M, Dane S, et al. Importance of anatomical asymmetries of transverse sinuses: an MR venographic study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004; 18(3): 236–239.
  3. Apaydın F, Yalçınoğlu O, Yıldız A, et al. Arachnoid granulations in the transverse sinuses of a patient with ocular melanoma. J Clin Neurosci. 2003; 10(1): 132–134.
  4. Ayanzen RH, Bird RC, Keller PJ, et al. Cerebral MR Venography: Normal Anatomy and Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls. Am J Neuroradiology. 2000; 21(1): 74–78.
  5. Browning H. The confluence of dural venous sinuses. Am J Anat. 1953; 93(3): 307–329.
  6. Canedo-Antelo M, Baleato-González S, Mosqueira AJ, et al. Radiologic Clues to Cerebral Venous Thrombosis. Radiographics. 2019; 39(6): 1611–1628.
  7. Cullen S, Demengie F, Ozanne A, et al. The anastomotic venous circle of the base of the brain. Interv Neuroradiol. 2005; 11(4): 325–332.
  8. Durgun B, Ilglt ET, Cizmeli MO, et al. Evaluation by angiography of the lateral dominance of the drainage of the dural venous sinuses. Surg Radiol Anat. 1993; 15(2): 125–130.
  9. Farb RI, Scott JN, Willinsky RA, et al. Intracranial venous system: gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional MR venography with auto-triggered elliptic centric-ordered sequence--initial experience. Radiology. 2003; 226(1): 203–209.
  10. Ferro JM, Aguiar de Sousa D. Cerebral venous thrombosis: an update. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2019; 19(10): 74.
  11. Goyal G, Singh R, Bansal N, et al. Anatomical Variations of Cerebral MR Venography: Is Gender Matter? Neurointervention. 2016; 11(2): 92–98.
  12. Haroun AA, Mahafza WS, Al Najar MS. Arachnoid granulations in the cerebral dural sinuses as demonstrated by contrast-enhanced 3D magnetic resonance venography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2007; 29(4): 323–328.
  13. Ivashchuk RG, Tubbs S. Anatomy, imaging and surgery of intracranial dural venous sinuses, 1st ed. Elsevier Book, Seattle, Washington 2020: 29–35.
  14. Kaplan HA, Browder J. Atresia of the rostral superior sagittal sinus: substitute parasagittal venous channels. J Neurosurg. 1973; 38(5): 602–607.
  15. Konez O. Manyetik rezonans görüntüleme [Turkish Book]. 1st Ed. Nobel tıp kitap evleri ltd, Istanbul 1995: 12–95.
  16. Manara R, Mardari R, Ermani M, et al. Transverse dural sinuses: incidence of anatomical variants and flow artefacts with 2D time-of-flight MR venography at 1 Tesla. Radiol Med. 2010; 115(2): 326–338.
  17. Manjila S, Bazil T, Thomas M, et al. A review of extraaxial developmental venous anomalies of the brain involving dural venous flow or sinuses: persistent embryonic sinuses, sinus pericranii, venous varices or aneurysmal malformations, and enlarged emissary veins. Neurosurg Focus. 2018; 45(1): E9.
  18. Mattle HP, Wentz KU, Edelman RR, et al. Cerebral venography with MR. Radiology. 1991; 178(2): 453–458.
  19. Ozsvath RR, Casey SO, Lustrin ES, et al. Cerebral venography: comparison of CT and MR projection venography. Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169(6): 1699–1707.
  20. Provenzale JM, Kranz PG. Dural sinus thrombosis: sources of error in image interpretation. Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196(1): 23–31.
  21. Rizzo L, Crasto SG, Rudà R, et al. Cerebral venous thrombosis: role of CT, MRI and MRA in the emergency setting. Radiol Med. 2010; 115(2): 313–325.
  22. Sajjad ZM. and MRV in cerebral venous thrombosis. J Pak Med Assoc. 2006; 56(11): 523–526.
  23. Sharma UK, Sharma K. Intracranial MR venography using l ow-Field magnet: normal anatomy and variations in nepalese population. J Nepal Med Assoc. 2012; 52(186): 61–65.
  24. Shin HS, Choi DS, Baek HJ, et al. The oblique occipital sinus: anatomical study using bone subtraction 3D CT venography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2017; 39(6): 619–628.
  25. Silva PS, Vilarinho A, Carvalho B, et al. Anatomical variations of the vein of Labbé: an angiographic study. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014; 36(8): 769–773.
  26. Surendrababu N, Livingstone RS. Variations in the cerebral venous anatomy and pitfalls in the diagnosis of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: Low field MR experience. Indian J Med Sci. 2006; 60(4): 135–142.
  27. Trimble CR, Harnsberger HR, Castillo M, et al. "Giant" arachnoid granulations just like CSF?: NOT!! Am J Neuroradiol. 2010; 31(9): 1724–1728.
  28. Tubbs RS, Goren O, McBain L. Anatomy, Imaging and Surgery of the Intracranial Dural Venous Sinuses, 1st Ed. Elsevier Book, Seattle, Washington 2020: 1–7.
  29. Wang J, Wang J, Sun J, et al. Evaluation of the anatomy and variants of internal cerebral veins with phase-sensitive MR imaging. Surg Radiol Anat. 2010; 32(7): 669–674.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl