Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig 1.
Flow chart of the study.
- Fig 2.
Sagittal T1 TSE (A), sagittal T2 TSE (B), sagittal 3D MEDIC (C), and axial reformat of the 3D MEDIC (D), from spinal cord screening research MR imaging and corresponding SWI from brain research MR imaging done on the same day (E). On sagittal 3D MEDIC (C), arrowsdenote small SCCM. D, Axial reformat shows small CM in the right aspect of the spinal cord (arrow), corresponding to the more inferior of the 2 lesions. E, SWI of the brain shows multiple CMs which are typical of familial CCM syndrome.
- Fig 3.
A, Sagittal T1 TSE and sagittal T2 TSE (B), from clinical MR imaging of the thoracic spine demonstrates spinal cord hemorrhage from a SCCM. On sagittal T1 TSE (A), there are T1 hyperintense blood products tracking down the thoracic spinal cord (arrow) toward the conus medularis. On sagittal T2 TSE (B), there are mixed-signal blood products (arrow) at the site of the spinal cord cavernous malformation.
Tables
- Table 1:
Analysis of sequence sensitivity for SCCM, retrospectively performed on 15 clinically performed cervical spine MR imaging studies
Number of SCCMs Detected Sensitivity Relative to Total Number of SCCMs Sagittal T1 TSE 3 of 21 14.3% (95% CI, 3.0%–36.3%) Sagittal T2 TSE 6 of 21 28.6% (95% CI, 11.2%–52.2%) Axial T2 TSE 5 of 21 23.8% (95% CI, 8.2%–47.2%) Axial T2 MEDIC 17 of 21 81.0% (95% CI, 58.1%–94.6%) 3D MEDIC 8 of 8a 100% (95% CI, 68.8%–100%) ↵a 3D MEDIC sequence was performed on a subset of patients.
Prevalence Lesions per Patient Spinal cord cavernous malformations 21/29 72.4% (95% CI, 52.8%–87.3%) Mean = 3.2 (SD 3.9) Median = 2 Range = 0–17 Cerebral cavernous malformations 29/29 100% (95% CI, 90.2%–100%) Mean = 105.7 (SD 128.0) Median = 53 Range = 4–584 Vertebral osseous vascular malformations 20/29 69.0% (95% CI, 49.2%–84.7%) Mean = 1.6 (SD 1.7) Median = 1 Range = 0–7
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.