4.4 Review

Cerebral venous thrombosis: state of the art diagnosis and management

期刊

NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 60, 期 7, 页码 669-685

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-018-2032-2

关键词

Venous stroke; Venous thrombosis; Neurovascular; Algorithm; Review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review article aims to discuss the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and neuroimaging of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Different approaches for diagnosis of CVT, including CT/CTV, MRI/MRV, and US will be discussed and the reader will become acquainted with imaging findings as well as limitations of each modality. Lastly, this exhibit will review the standard of care for CVT treatment and emerging endovascular options. A literature search using PubMed and the MEDLINE subengine was completed using the terms cerebral venous thrombosis, stroke, and imaging. Studies reporting on the workup, imaging characteristics, clinical history, and management of patients with CVT were included. The presentation of CVT is often non-specific and requires a high index of clinical suspicion. Signs of CVT on NECT can be divided into indirect signs (edema, parenchymal hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and rarely subdural hematomas) and less commonly direct signs (visualization of dense thrombus within a vein or within the cerebral venous sinuses). Confirmation is performed with CTV, directly demonstrating the thrombus as a filling defect, or MRI/MRV, which also provides superior characterization of parenchymal abnormalities. General pitfalls and anatomic variants will also be discussed. Lastly, endovascular management options including thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy are discussed. CVT is a relatively uncommon phenomenon and frequently overlooked at initial presentation. Familiarity with imaging features and diagnostic work-up of CVT will help in providing timely diagnosis and therapy which can significantly improve outcome and diminish the risk of acute and long-term complications, optimizing patient care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据