Intracranial aneurysms

Abstract

MR angiography provides a rapid, accurate, and extremely flexible noninvasive evaluation of intracranial aneurysms without the cost and risk of conventional angiography. TOF and phase contrast techniques each have specific advantages and disadvantages that can be selectively exploited to optimize aneurysm evaluation. Present indications for MR angiography in aneurysm evaluation include: (1) the presence of incidental findings on a CT or MR examination that suggest the possibility of aneurysm (Figs. 7 and 8), (2) when angiography is contraindicated or when the risk is too high, (3) non-invasive follow-up of patients with known aneurysms, (4) patient refusal of contrast angiography, and (5) evaluation of patients with specific clinical symptoms (i.e., third cranial nerve palsy) or patients with non-specific subacute symptoms in whom an aneurysm might explain the clinical presentation. Although MR angiography certainly can detect aneurysms with a high rate of sensitivity and specificity, detailed decision analyses generally have not supported the overall benefit of this type of screening. Future technical advances as well as advances in the overall understanding of aneurysms may one day prove unequivocally the benefit of MR angiography in screening high-risk patient groups. MR angiography has not yet been clinically evaluated as a tool in the evaluation of acute subarachnoid hemorrhage. Potential obstacles to such an evaluation include the clinical instability of SAH patients, limited spatial resolution of the MR angiography acquisitions, the potential for subarachnoid blood or focal intraparenchymal hematomas to obscure or mimic small aneurysms, and the unreliability of MR angiography in demonstrating vasospasm. Currently these factors continue to provide an integral role for contrast angiography in aneurysm evaluation.