磁共振血管成像在支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞颅内动脉瘤术后患者随访中的应用

目的评价3.0 T磁共振血管成像(MRA)技术在颅内动脉瘤支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术后随访中的应用。方法回顾性连续纳入2013年6月至2015年6月深圳市第六人民医院神经外科因颅内动脉瘤破裂致蛛网膜下腔出血行支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术患者32例,其中男12例,女20例,平均年龄(56±10)岁,术前均经DSA证实为单发颅内动脉瘤。于术后1~2年,对所有患者采用3.0 T时间飞跃法MRA(TOF-MRA)和对比剂增强法MRA(CE-MRA)进行影像学随访,以DSA结果为"金标准",对动脉瘤栓塞效果(稳定、进一步栓塞、再通/复发)及载瘤动脉的通畅性(无狭窄/轻度狭窄、中重度狭窄及闭塞)进行比较。结果 (1)TOF-MRA、CE-MRA及TOF-MRA结合源图像评估支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术后动脉瘤效果与DSA的一致性比较,分别为一致性较差(Kappa=0.039,P=0.002)、一致性中等(Kappa=0.582,P0.01)、一致性较高(Kappa=0.615,P0.01)。(2)TOF-MRA及CE-MRA评估支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术后载瘤动脉通畅性与DSA的一致性均较差(Kappa=0.171,P=0.211;Kappa=0.376,P=0.010)。(3)以DSA结果为参照,TOF-MRA、TOFMRA结合源图像和CE-MRA对动脉瘤栓塞情况判读的准确率分别为37.5%(12例)、75.0%(24例)和71.9%(23例),TOF-MRA分别与TOF-MRA结合源图像及CE-MRA比较,准确率的差异均有统计学意义(χ~2=9.04,P=0.003;χ~2=7.63,P=0.006);TOF-MRA结合源图像与CE-MRA的准确率差异无统计学意义(χ~2=0.08,P=0.777)。(4)以DSA结果为参照,TOF-MRA和CE-MRA对载瘤动脉通畅性判读的准确率分别为37.5%(12例)和62.5%(20例),准确率的差异无统计学意义(χ~2=4.67,P=0.097)。结论 3.0 T CE-MRA评估支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术后颅内动脉瘤效果的准确率优于TOF-MRA,可作为随访的首选无创检查,TOF-MRA结合源图像与CE-MRA相当,但TOF-MRA及CE-MRA对评估载瘤动脉通畅性的准确性均较低。对于MRA检查阳性或不确定性结果,应进行个体化分析,必要时行DSA检查。

Application of magnetic resonance angiography in the follow-up of patients after embolization of intracranial aneurysms with stent-assisted coils

Objective To evaluate the application of 3.0 T magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) in follow-up after embolization of intracranial aneurysms with stent-assisted coils.Methods From June 2013 to June 2015,32 consecutive patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage due to ruptured intracranial aneurysms underwent stent-assisted coil embolization at the Department of Neurosurgery,the Sixth People′s Hospital of Shenzhen were enrolled retrospectively,including 12 males and 20 female,their mean age was 56±10 years.All patients were confirmed to be solitary intracranial aneurysms by digital subtraction angiography (DSA) before embolization.They were followed up with 3.0 T time of flight MRA (TOF-MRA) and contrast enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) at 1 to 2 years after embolization.DSA findings were served as the "golden standard".The effect of aneurysm embolization (stabilization,further embolization,recanalization/recurrence) and patency of the parent arteries (without stenosis/mild stenosis,moderate to severe stenosis and occlusion) were compared.Results (1) The comparisons of evaluating the aneurysmal effects and consistencies of DSA among TOF-MRA,CE-MRA and TOF-MRA+source images after stent-assisted coil embolization were poor (Kappa=0.039,P=0.002),medium (Kappa=0.582,P<0.01),and higher (Kappa=0.615,P<0.01),respectively.(2) The comparison of the consistencies in the patency of the parent artery after stent-assisted coil embolization between TOF-MRA,CE-MRA and DSA were poor (Kappa=0.171,P=0.211;Kappa=0.376,P=0.010).(3) With the DSA findings as reference,the accuracy rates of TOF-MRA,TOF-MRA+source images and CE-MRA for interpretation of aneurysm embolization were 37.5% (12/32),75.0% (24/32),and 71.9% (23/32),respectively.TOF-MRA compared with TOF-MRA+source images and CE-MRA respectively,there were significant differences in the accuracy rates (χ2=9.04,P=0.003;χ2=7.63,P=0.006);there were no significant differences in the accuracy rates between TOF-MRA+source images and CE-MRA (χ2=0.08,P=0.777).(4) With the DSA findings as reference,the accuracy rates of TOF-MRA and CE-MRA for interpretation of the patency of the parent artery were 37.5% (12/32) and 62.5% (20/32) respectively.There was no significant difference in the accuracy rate (χ2=4.67,P=0.097).Conclusions The accuracy rate of 3.0 T CE-MRA for evaluating the embolization effect of intracranial aneurysms after stent-assisted coil embolization was superior to that of TOF-MRA.It can be used as a preferred non-invasive examination during the follow-up.TOF-MRA+source images are equivalent to CE-MRA,however,TOF-MRA and CE-MRA for the evaluation of the accuracy of patency of the parent arteries are low.For positive or indeterminate results of MRA examinations,the individualized analysis should be performed,if necessary,perform DSA examination.