Evaluation of Aqueductal Patency in Patients with Hydrocephalus: Three-Dimensional High-Sampling-Efficiency Technique (SPACE) versus Two-Dimensional Turbo Spin Echo at 3 Tesla

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of diagnosing aqueductal patency and image quality between high spatial resolution three-dimensional (3D) high-sampling-efficiency technique (sampling perfection with application optimized contrast using different flip angle evolutions [SPACE]) and T2-weighted (T2W) two-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE) at 3-T in patients with hydrocephalus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 99 patients diagnosed with hydrocephalus. T2W 3D-SPACE was added to the routine sequences which consisted of T2W 2D-TSE, 3D-constructive interference steady state (CISS), and cine phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI). Two radiologists evaluated independently the patency of cerebral aqueduct and image quality on the T2W 2D-TSE and T2W 3D-SPACE. PC-MRI and 3D-CISS were used as the reference for aqueductal patency and image quality, respectively. Inter-observer agreement was calculated using kappa statistics. RESULTS: The evaluation of the aqueductal patency by T2W 3D-SPACE and T2W 2D-TSE were in agreement with PC-MRI in 100% (99/99; sensitivity, 100% [83/83]; specificity, 100% [16/16]) and 83.8% (83/99; sensitivity, 100% [67/83]; specificity, 100% [16/16]), respectively (p < 0.001). No significant difference in image quality between T2W 2D-TSE and T2W 3D-SPACE (p = 0.056) occurred. The kappa values for inter-observer agreement were 0.714 for T2W 2D-TSE and 0.899 for T2W 3D-SPACE. CONCLUSION: Three-dimensional-SPACE is superior to 2D-TSE for the evaluation of aqueductal patency in hydrocephalus. T2W 3D-SPACE may hold promise as a highly accurate alternative treatment to PC-MRI for the physiological and morphological evaluation of aqueductal patency.

Are Spinal or Paraspinal Anatomic Markers Helpful for Vertebral Numbering and Diagnosing Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of spinal and paraspinal anatomic markers in both the diagnosis of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTVs) and identification of vertebral levels on lumbar MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lumbar MRI from 1049 adult patients were studied. By comparing with the whole-spine localizer, the diagnostic errors in numbering vertebral segments on lumbar MRI were evaluated. The morphology of S1-2 disc, L5 and S1 body, and lumbar spinous processes (SPs) were evaluated by using sagittal MRI. The positions of right renal artery (RRA), superior mesenteric artery, aortic bifurcation (AB) and conus medullaris (CM) were described. RESULTS: The diagnostic error for evaluation of vertebral segmentation on lumbar MRI alone was 14.1%. In lumbarization, all patients revealed a well-formed S1-2 disc with squared S1 body. A rhombus-shaped L5 body in sacralization and a rectangular-shaped S1 body in lumbarization were found. The L3 had the longest SP. The most common sites of spinal and paraspinal structures were: RRA at L1 body (53.6%) and L1-2 disc (34.1%), superior mesenteric artery at L1 body (55.1%) and T12-L1 disc (31.6%), and AB at L4 body (71.1%). CM had variable locations, changing from the T12-L1 disc to L2 body. They were located at higher sacralization and lower lumbarization. CONCLUSION: The spinal morphologic features and locations of the spinal and paraspinal structures on lumbar MRI are not completely reliable for the diagnosis of LSTVs and identification on the vertebral levels.