|
| Cine phase-contrast MRI evaluation of normal aqueductal cerebrospinal fluid flow according to sex and age |
| Özkan Ünal, Alp Kartum, Serhat Avcu, Ömer Etlik, Halil Arslan, Aydın Bora |
| From the Department of Radiology, Yüzüncü Yıl University School of Medicine, Van, Turkey |
| Keywords: • magnetic resonance imaging, cine • cerebrospinal fluid • cerebral aqueduct |
| DOI: 10.4261/1305-3825.DIR.2321-08.1 |
|
|
|
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was cerebrospinal flow quantification
in the cerebral aqueduct using cine phase-contrast magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) technique in both sexes and five different
age groups to provide normative data.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sixty subjects with no cerebral pathology were included in this
study. Subjects were divided into five age groups: ≤14 years,
15–24 years, 25–34 years, 35–44 years, and ≥45 years. Phase,
rephase, and magnitude images were acquired by 1.5 T MR
unit at the level of cerebral aqueduct with spoiled gradient
echo through-plane, which is a cine phase-contrast sequence.
At this level, peak flow velocity (cm/s), average flow rate (cm/
s), average flow (L/min), volumes in cranial and caudal directions
(mL), and net volumes (mL) were studied.
RESULTS
There was a statistically significant difference in peak flow between
the age group of ≤14 years and the older age groups.
There were no statistically significant differences in average
velocity, cranial and caudal volume, net volume, and average
flow parameters among different age groups. Statistically
significant differences were not detected in flow parameters
between sexes.
CONCLUSION
When using cine-phase contrast MRI in the cerebral aqueduct,
only the peak velocity showed a statistically significant difference
between age groups; it was higher in subjects aged ≤14
years than those in older age groups. When performing agedependent
clinical studies including adolescents, this should
be taken into consideration. |
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) depicts cerebral tissue without
need for contrast media in cerebral pathologies and gives
detailed information on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and CSF flow
pathways. In addition, physiopathologic evaluations including studies
on CSF flow dynamics can be carried out by using cine-phase contrast
techniques without need for invasive procedures such as contrast media
injection or catheterization[ 1, 2].
Evaluation of CSF flow physiology and pathologies with cine-phase
contrast MRI evaluation has gained momentum in the last 15 years.
Studies using this technique, which is very sensitive even to slow flow,
have focused on the ventricular system, subarachnoid spaces, spinal canal,
and the cerebral aqueduct[3–5].
Following expression of flow through aqueduct quantitatively, an understanding
of normal flow patterns was initially achieved, and flow
changes in various pathologies were scrutinized. Communicating and
obstructive hydrocephalus, Chiari malformation, and arachnoid cysts
were the initial pathologies studied[6–9]. Postsurgical clinical applications,
such as evaluation of third ventriculostomy patency and aqueductal
CSF flow evaluation following endoscopic aqueductoplasty came
into use afterwards[10,11]. The characterization of normal CSF flow
dynamics can provide pathophysiological information on diseases affecting
CSF circulation by contributing to normal reference values.
In this study, aqueductal CSF flow parameters in different age groups
were investigated using cine-phase contrast MRI technique, with the
aim of measuring differences in flow parameters among age groups and
sexes. |
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|
In this six-month prospective study, 60 subjects who underwent imaging
for other indications but were found to have no abnormalities were
included. Written consent was obtained from all subjects or legal representatives
of subjects before the procedures. Of the cases, 25 (41.6%) were
female and 35 (58.3%) were males, with ages ranging from 6 years to 70
years (mean, 31.2). The individuals were divided into five age groups: ≤14
years, 15–24 years, 25–34 years, 35–44 years, and ≥45 years. The mean
ages in groups were as follows respectively: 9.1 years, 20.1 years, 30.1
years, 40.3 years, and 57.7 years.
MRI examinations were performed with 1.5 T MR unit (Siemens Symphony,
Erlangen, Germany). Imaging was carried out using standard
head coils, in neutral supine position and without any case preparation.
Subjects were asked to avoid deep breathing during the examination.
Routine cranial axial and sagittal fast spin echo (FSE) T2-weighted
images were acquired (TR/TE/NEX/FA, 5540/97/2/150°; slice thickness,
5 mm; FOV, 250; matrix, 189 × 256).
In all cases, cardiac gating was performed
with MR compatible electrodes
(Kendall, Arbo, Tyco International, Neustadt,
Germany). A localizer was placed
on cerebral aqueduct, perpendicular to
ampullar region of the aqueduct on sagittal
T2-weighted images; care was taken
to be sure that the localizer line passed
through the aqueductal plane on axial
images. Using the above-mentioned T2-
weighted image, axial images of spoiled
gradient echo (SGE) through-plane sequence,
which is the cine-phase contrast
MRI sequence in the software, were
acquired. The measurement parameters
of this sequence were as follows: TR/TE/
NEX/FA, 43/12/1/10°; slice thickness, 3
mm; gap, 1 mm; FOV, 160 mm; matrix, 192 × 256; duration, approx. 4 min.
Velocity encoding (Venc) was selected
as 20 cm/s in all cases. Directional programming
was selected as positive for
caudocranial direction and negative
for craniocaudal direction in the software.
Total examination duration was
approximately fifteen minutes, including
electrode placement, T2-weighted
sequence, and SGE through-plane sequence
acquisitions.
The acquired SGE through-plane
images were transferred to Argus postprocessing
program. In all cases, CSF
flow was initially evaluated qualitatively
following acquisitions of phase,
rephase, and magnitude images. While
the flow in the cerebral aqueduct had high signal intensity in rephase and
magnitude images, cranial flow had
high signal intensity and caudal flow
had low signal intensity in phase images.
Images were magnified so the
aqueduct could be seen optimally. As
the flow and the contrast between the
aqueduct and the adjacent cerebral
structures were more prominent in
rephase and magnitude images, a circular
region of interest (ROI) was placed
carefully on each image manually in
one of those series. CSF flow changes
throughout one cardiac cycle were extracted
automatically from the program
by velocity-time, peak velocity-time,
flow-time, and net flow-time graphics
( ). In these graphics, the area above the baseline represented cranial
flow, while the area below the baseline
showed caudal flow. Average velocity
is shown by velocity-time graphic. The
area above the baseline shows cranial
and the area below the baseline represents
caudal velocities. Peak velocity
parameter is represented by peak velocity-
time graphic. In the flow-time
graphic, cranial flow is shown above
the baseline while the caudal flow is
shown below the baseline. Net flow is
represented in net flow-time graphic.
Net flow is extracted by integrating aqueductal
area to the net volume.
 Click to Enlarge |
Figure 1: a–d. (a) Graphic showing aqueductal CSF velocity change with time in a single cardiac cycle. The area above tha baseline represents
cranial velocity, while the area below the baseline represents caudal velocity. (b) Graphic showing aqueductal CSF peak velocity with time
in a single cardiac cycle. (c) Graphic showing aqueductal CSF flow change with time in a single cardiac cycle. The area above the baseline
represents cranial flow, while the area below the baseline represents caudal flow. (d) Graphic showing net aqueductal CSF flow in a single
cardiac cycle. The curve in this graphic is different from the rest of the graphic curves; the end point of the curve gives the net flow value. |
For each individual, aqueductal area
(mm2); aqueductal peak flow velocity
(cm/s); average flow rate (cm/s); average
flow (L/min), calculated by average
velocity × area of ROI); volumes in
cranial and caudal directions (mL) in
a cardiac cycle; and net volumes (mL),
which are the sum of both amounts,
were obtained quantitatively and with
graphics.
Statistical analysis was performed
using the SPSS statstical program. For
double group comparison (between
the group ≤14 years and other age
groups), post hoc Mann-Whitney U
test was used and for multiple group
comparison, Kruskal-Wallis variance
analysis was used. Multiple comparisons
between sexes were performed
by Student t test. Variable correlations
(positive and negative correlations between
age and flow parameters) were tested by Spearman rho rank test. Statistical
significance was established at
P < 0.05. |
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|
For all patients aqueductal area was
in a range of 1.2–4.8 mm 2 (mean, 2.6).
Four of the cases had an aqueductal
area less than 1.5 mm 2 (1.2 mm 2 being
the lowest).
The mean flow parameter values
were calculated with standard deviations
(Table 1). While there was significant
difference among age groups
for peak velocity with Kruskal-Wallis
variance analysis, there was no significant
difference among other variables.
On correlation study done by
post-hoc Mann-Whitney U test, the
peak velocity values in the 14 and
younger group was found significantly
higher than 15–24, 25–34, and
35–44 age groups (P < 0.01, P < 0.05,
and P < 0.01, respectively). There was
no significant difference between the
peak velocity values of groups aged
≤14 years and ≥45 years. Although
the average velocity, cranial, and net
volume parameters were decreased,
and average flow and caudal volume
parameters were increased with age,
the results were not statistically significant.
While significant reverse-correlation
between age and peak velocity
was found (P < 0.05), no significant
correlation was observed between age
and other parameters. Also, without considering the age differences, there
was no statistically significant difference
between sexes (Table 2).
 Click to Enlarge |
Table 1: The mean flow parameter values (± standard deviation) according to age groups |
 Click to Enlarge |
Table 2: The mean flow parameter values (± standard deviation) of both sexes |
|
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|
Cine phase-contrast MRI has many
advantages including non-invasiveness,
no need for patient preparation
or contrast media injection, no X-ray
exposure, and an overall examination
duration less than 15 min.
Today, although the high resolution
imaging units are in use, there are still
errors about velocity data. The reasons
for the occurrence of these errors are
reported as non-linearity of the gradients,
eddy currents, partial volume
effects, and error in ROI placement[5,12,13]. In cases with narrow aqueducts,
the error rate can increase due to
difficulty in ROI placement[14]. Reliable
flow quantification is reported to
be feasible if the diameter of the lumen
is greater than 1.5 mm2[15]. In our
study, four cases had an aqueductal
area less than 1.5 mm2, 1.2 mm2 being
the lowest. However, these individuals
did not have significant differences
fom the rest of the cases concerning
flow parameters. Mean aqueductal area
values were between 2.01–3.10 mm2
(mean, 2.67) according to age groups,
whereas this value was between 1.2
and 4.8 mm2 (mean, 2.35) independent
of age. These results are consistent
with the findings of studies in the
literature[9,16,17]. The comparison of aqueductal area among age groups
yielded statistically significant results,
but we do not consider this finding to
be clinically important. Likewise, there
were no statistically significant differences
in the aqueductal area between
sexes.
Velocity encoding (Venc) is the parameter
showing sensitivity for the
flow. The chosen Venc values show the
maximal intraluminal flow velocity on
the images. While a choice of Venc just
over the maximum peak velocity increases
accuracy, smaller chosen values
will yield smaller results[14]. Generally,
the chosen Venc in aqueductal flow
studies in the literature vary between
15 and 20 cm/s[10,12,15,18]. Based
on our experience and reports in the
literature we chose Venc as 20 cm/s.
On the other hand, in patients who are
predicted to have higher Venc, a higher
value should be chosen. Cardiac gating
can be achieved either prospectively or
retrospectively. In our study we used
prospective gating, which is the generally
available form[12]. The duration
of prospective gating is longer than
the retrospective form. The acquisition
stops within about 200 ms of the next
R wave for accurate detection of the
next trigger. Thus the entire cardiac cycle
(particularly the diastolic phase) is
not evaluated. These are the disadvantages
of prospective gating compared
to the retrospective form.
Two changes in CSF circulatory
physiology have been noted as part of
aging: first, a trend towards lower CSF
production, hence a decrease in CSF
turnover; and second, greater resistance
to CSF outflow[18,19]. Silverberg et al.
suggest that if CSF production failure
predominates, Alzheimer disease develops
and if resistance to CSF outflow
predominates, normal pressure hydrocephalus
develops[19]. On the other
hand, Luetmer et al. found similar CSF
flow rates in normal elderly patients,
patients with Alzheimer disease, and
patients with other forms of cognitive
impairment (excluding normal pressure
hydrocephalus), which suggests
that flow rates are independent of cerebral
atrophy[20]. Slightly higher aqueductal
CSF peak flow velocities and
volume flow in both cranial and caudal
directions were found in the group
of elderly healthy volunteers, however,
this was not statistically significant[5,21]. In various studies, aqueductal
peak velocities are reported to show great physiologic variations, independent
of age (1.5–12.7 cm/s)[5,8,10,14,15]. In our study, the peak velocities
were found between 1.41 and 11.67
cm/s. For peak velocity, a statistically
slight difference was found between
≤14 years age group and 15–24, 25–34,
and 35–44 years age groups. There were
no statistically significant differences
among the other groups. Although, the
age dependent nonsignificant results
in flow parameters were in consistency
with the studies in the literature[4,5,14,18,20], the only difference was the
slight statistical difference between ≤14
years age group with the other groups.
Because there are few studies concerning
adolescents, and these studies
include small numbers of subjects, no
comparison could be performed for this
age group. In our study, we divided the
individuals into five groups according
to their ages including the adolescent
age group ≤14 years. When the statististical
difference between the adolescent
group and the other age groups is
taken into consideration, even though
the difference is slight, we think that
this difference should be considered in
future clinical studies.
Different values have been reported
in the literature for cranial, caudal and
net volume parameters. Lee et al.[14],
Brinkmann et al.[15], and Enzmann
and Pelc[17] reported the following
net volume results: 0.03 ± 0.01, 0.04
± 0.02, and 0.06 ± 0.034 mL, respectively.
As for cranial and caudal volumes,
Schroeder et al. reported cranial
values of 0.06 mL and caudal values
0.06–0.07 mL[10], while Barkhof et al.
reported cranial values of 0.16 ± 0.10
mL and caudal values of 0.29 ± 0.19
mL[5]. None of the above studies were
performed with multiple age groups,
and none included the adolescent age
group. In our study, cranial, caudal,
and net volume values were 0.002–
0.034, 0.005–0.044, and 0.001–0.044
mL, respectively, independent of age.
We think that these results represent
normal physiologic variations.
In cine phase-contrast MR examination
of aqueductal flow, average velocity,
cranial and net volume parameters,
average flow and caudal volume
parameters of all age groups were not
statistically significant. As for peak velocity,
a statistically significant difference
was found between age groups,
which is consistent with other studies
in the literature[22,23]. İskandar and Haughton stated that peak CSF velocities
vary significantly with age, and to
determine the normalcy of a CSF flow
measurement, it should be compared
with age-appropriate normative data[22]. Stoquart-ElSankari et al. concluded
that CSF stroke volumes were significantly
reduced in the elderly[23].
In our study, there were no statistically
significant differences among the other
groups. Sex also had no statistically
significant effect on flow parameters.
As a conclusion, in this study including
a large number of cases, all of the
peak velocities were within 1.41–11.67
cm/s range. As there were no meaningless
high values, the values that are
considerably larger than 11.67 should
be used as clinicopathologic data in future
studies. On the other hand, even
though we have found net volume
values in the 0.001–0.044 mL range independent
of age, which seems quite
wide, we think that values higher than
0.044 would be useful in future clinical
studies. |
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|
1) Bradley WG Jr, Scalzo D, Nitz WN. Normalpressure
hydrocephalus: evaluation with
cerebrospinal fluid flow measurements at
MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 198:523–
529.
2) Krauss JK, Regel JP, Vach W, Jüngling FD.
Flow void of cerebrospinal fluid in idiopathic
normal pressure hydrocephalus of
the elderly: can it predict outcome after
shunting? Neurosurgery 1997; 40:67–73.
3) Sherman JL, Citrin CM, Gangarosa RE,
Bowen BJ. The MR appearance of CSF
pulsations in the spinal canal. AJNR Am J
Neuroradiol 1986; 7:879–884.
4) Jacobson EE, Fletcher DF, Morgan MK,
Johnston IH. Fluid dynamics of the cerebral
aqueduct. Pediatr Neurosurg 1996;
24:229–236.
5) Barkhof F, Kouwenhoven M, Scheltens P.
Phase-contrast cine MR imaging of normal
aqueductal CSF flow. Effect of aging and
relation to CSF void on modulus MR. Acta
Radiol 1994; 35:123–130.
6) Panigrahi M, Reddy BP, Reddy AK, Reddy
JJ. CSF flow study in Chiari I malformation.
Childs Nerv Syst 2004; 20:336–340.
7) Eguchi T, Taoka T, Nikaido Y, et al. Cine
magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of
communication between middle cranial
fossa arachnoid cysts and cisterns. Neurol
Med Chir 1996; 36:353–357.
8) Kim DS, Choi JU, Ryoong Huh R, Yun PH,
Kim DI. Quantitative assessment of cerebrospinal
fluid hydrodynamics using a phasecontrast
cine MR image in hydrocephalus.
Childs Nerv Syst 1999; 15:461–467.
9) Menick B. Phase-contrast magnetic resonance
imaging of cerebrospinal fluid flow in
the evaluation of patients with Chiari I malformation.
Neurosurg Focus 2001; 11:E5.
10) Schroeder HW, Schweim C, Schweim KH,
Gaab MR. Analysis of aqueductal cerebrospinal
fluid flow after endoscopic aqueductoplasty
by using cine phase-contrast
magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosurg
2000; 93:237–244.
11) Hoffmann KT, Lehmann TN, Baumann
C, Felix R. CSF flow imaging in the management
of third ventriculostomy with
a reversed fast imaging with steady-state
precession sequence. Eur Radiol 2003;
13:1432–1437.
12) Nitz WR, Bradley WG Jr, Watanabe AS, et
al. Flow dynamics of cerebrospinal fluid:
Assessment with phase-contrast velocity
MR imaging performed with retrospective
cardiac gating. Radiology 1992; 183:395–
13) Henry Feugeas M-C, Idy-Peretti I, Blanchet
B, Hassine D, Zannoli G, Schouman-Claeys
E. Temporal and spatial assessment of normal
cerebrospinal fluid dynamics with
MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1993;
11:1107–1118.
14) Lee JH, Lee HK, Kim JK, Kim HJ, Park JK,
Choi CG. CSF flow quantification of the
cerebral aqueduct in normal volunteers
using phase contrast cine MR imaging.
Korean J Radiol 2004; 5:81–86.
15) Brinkmann G, Harlandt O, Muhle C,
Brossmann J, Heller M. Quantification of
fluid flow in magnetic resonance tomography:
an experimental study of a flow
model and liquid flow measurements in
the cerebral aqueduct in volunteers. Rofo
2000; 172:1043–1051.
16) Gideon P, Thomsen C, Ståhlberg F,
Henriksen O. Cerebrospinal fluid production
and dynamics in normal aging: a MRI
phase-mapping study. Acta Neurol Scand
1994; 89:362–366.
17) Enzmann DR, Pelc NJ. Cerebrospinal fluid
flow measured by phase-contrast cine MR.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1993; 14:1301–
1307.
18) Enzmann DR, Pelc NJ. Normal flow patterns
of intracranial and cerebrospinal
fluid defined with phase-contrast cine MR
imaging. Radiology 1991; 178:467–474.
19) Silverberg GD, Mayo M, Saul T, Rubenstein
E, McGuire D. Alzheimer’s disease, normal
pressure hydrocephalus, and senescent
changes in CSF circulatory physiology: a
hypothesis. Lancet Neurol 2003; 2:506–
511.
20) Luetmer PH, Huston J, Friedman JA, et al.
Measurement of cerebrospinal fluid flow
at the cerebral aqueduct by use of phasecontrast
magnetic resonance imaging:
Technique validation and utility in diagnosing
idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.
Neurosurgery 2002; 50:534–542.
21) May C, Kaye JA, Atack JR, Schapiro MB,
Friedland RP, Rapoport SL. Cerebrospinal
fluid production is reduced in healthy aging.
Neurology 1990; 40:500–503.
22) İskandar BJ, Haughton V. Age-related variations
in peak cerebrospinal fluid velocities
in the foramen magnum. J Neurosurg
2005; 103:508–511.
23) Stoquart-ElSankari S, Balédent O, Gondry-
Jouet C, Makki M, Godefroy O, Meyer ME.
Aging effects on cerebral blood and cerebrospinal
fluid flows. J Cereb Blood Flow
Metab 2007; 27:1563–1572. |
TopSummaryIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|
|