Warning: Declaration of My_Walker::start_el(&$output, $item, $depth, $args) should be compatible with Walker_Nav_Menu::start_el(&$output, $data_object, $depth = 0, $args = NULL, $current_object_id = 0) in /home2/ajnrblog/public_html/ajnrdigest/wp-content/themes/ajnr/functions.php on line 258
Applicability of Tableside Flat Panel Detector CT Parenchymal Cerebral Blood Volume Measurement in Neurovascular Interventions: Preliminary Clinical Experience - AJNR News Digest
November 2013
Interventional

Applicability of Tableside Flat Panel Detector CT Parenchymal Cerebral Blood Volume Measurement in Neurovascular Interventions: Preliminary Clinical Experience

Pasquale Mordasini

Pasquale Mordasini

Flat panel detector (FPD) angiographic systems have been widely introduced into neurointerventional suites. They primarily allow the acquisition of high-quality 3D rotational angiography, but also allow us to obtain CT-like cross-sectional soft tissue imaging with different reconstruction modalities. FPD technology has been shown to permit fast imaging without the need for time-consuming patient transfer to a CT facility, and, therefore, has already become a helpful tool for immediate “on the table” evaluation of treatment results and intraprocedural complications, such as assessment of the extent of subarachnoid or intracerebral hemorrhage and ventricle width.

Technological advances permit FPD parenchymal cerebral blood volume (FPD-CBV) measurements tableside in the neuroangiography suite immediately prior to, during, and just after an interventional procedure, by means of intravenous contrast injection. In our preliminary experience, FPD-CBV measurements provide an attractive and easy-to-use tool for peri-interventional neuroimaging, extending the tableside imaging modalities to the level of tissue perfusion, depicting CBV values comparable with standard multisection CT perfusion.

Adding cerebral perfusion maps as a physiologic parameter to guide treatment decisions and monitor treatment effect may particularly be of interest for endovascular recanalization therapies in patients with acute stroke. Patients may be transferred directly into the neuroangiography suite and undergo diagnostic imaging evaluation on the table. However, in our opinion, current limitations of the technology such as the lack of dynamic perfusion

measurements, and, especially, the inferior quality of soft tissue imaging compared with multidetector CT or MRI do not permit the use of FPD imaging as a first-line imaging modality. On the other hand, in our preliminary experience, patients admitted from referring hospitals for endovascular stroke therapy who have already undergone multimodal stroke imaging allowing for treatment decision and in whom intravenous bridging thrombolysis has already been initiated, may benefit from this accelerated workflow. Possible interim intracerebral hemorrhage and perfusion status can be re-evaluated just before starting the interventional procedure. Furthermore, current promising developments aim at extending this technology to dynamic perfusion measurements such as cerebral blood flow and further improving the quality of soft tissue imaging.

 

Read this article at AJNR.org . . .