4.4 Article

Indocyanine green videoangiography for assessment of postoperative hyperperfusion in moyamoya disease

期刊

ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA
卷 156, 期 5, 页码 919-926

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00701-014-2054-4

关键词

Moyamoya disease; Bypass; Hyperperfusion; Indocyanine green videoangiography

资金

  1. [24592134]
  2. [23791611]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Postoperative cerebral hyperperfusion (HP) is a notable complication that occurs more frequently in moyamoya disease (MMD) than in atherosclerosis. This study aimed to clarify the characteristics of intraoperative indocyanine green (ICG) videoangiography in MMD and atherosclerotic disease in terms of postoperative HP. This prospective study included 47 patients with 60 sides that underwent superior temporal artery (STA)-middle cerebral artery (MCA) single bypass. ICG videoangiography was performed after revascularization. The ICG time intensity curve was recorded in the STA, proximal MCA, distal MCA, and superficial Sylvian vein, and the angiographic differences among adult MMD, pediatric MMD, and atherosclerosis were analyzed. Twenty-two patients (27 sides) had adult MMD, 14 patients (22 sides) had pediatric MMD, and 11 patients (11 sides) had atherosclerosis. Postoperative HP was significantly higher in adult MMD (40.7 %) than in pediatric MMD (18.2 %) and atherosclerosis (0 %). Adult MMD with HP was associated with a longer ICG peak time (P < 0.001). There was no correlation between the ICG peak time and preoperative cerebral blood flow or vascular reserve. The ratio of the vessel caliber was also higher in adult MMD with HP (P < 0.001). ICG videoangiography provides different characteristics of bypass flow among adult MMD, pediatric MMD, and atherosclerosis. Poor run-off and stagnation of blood flow from the STA might contribute to postoperative HP in MMD. The occurrence of postoperative HP in MMD could depend on two factors: donor STA size and poor run-off and integrity of the blood brain barrier in the recipient MCA.

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