4.5 Article

Imaging and Management of Blunt Cerebrovascular Injury

期刊

RADIOGRAPHICS
卷 38, 期 2, 页码 542-563

出版社

RADIOLOGICAL SOC NORTH AMERICA
DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018170140

关键词

-

资金

  1. GE Radiology Research Academic Fellowship grant from the Association of University Radiologists
  2. National Institutes of Health [R21AR068009, R01NS092207 01A1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) is a relatively rare but potentially devastating finding in patients with high-energy blunt force trauma or direct cervical and/or craniofacial injury. The radiologist plays an essential role in identifying and grading the various types of vascular injury, including minimal intimal injury, dissection with raised intimal flap or intraluminal thrombus, intramural hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, occlusion, transection, and arteriovenous fistula. Early identification of BCVI is important, as treatment with antithrombotic therapy has been shown to reduce the incidence of postinjury ischemic stroke. Patients with specific mechanisms of injury, particular imaging findings, or certain clinical signs and symptoms have been identified as appropriate and cost-effective for BCVI screening. Although digital subtraction angiography was previously considered the standard examination for screening, technologic improvements have led to its replacement with computed tomographic angiography. Of note, although not appropriate for screening, improvements in magnetic resonance angiography with vessel wall imaging hold promise as supplemental imaging studies that may improve diagnostic specificity for vessel wall injuries. Understanding the screening criteria, imaging modalities of choice, imaging appearances, and grading of BCVI is essential for the radiologist to ensure fast and appropriate diagnosis and treatment. This article details the imaging evaluation of BCVI and discusses the clinical and follow-up imaging implications of specific injury findings. (C) RSNA, 2018

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

4.5
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