Comparison of phase-contrast MR and flow simulations for the study of CSF dynamics in the cervical spine. Issue 3 (June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lindstrøm, Erika Kristina; Schreiner, Jakob; Ringstad, Geir Andre; Haughton, Victor; Eide, Per Kristian; Mardal, Kent-Andre
• Is Part Of: Neuroradiology journal. Volume 31:Issue 3(2018:Jun.)
• Page Start: 292
• Page End: 298
• Publication Date: 2018-06
• Subjects: CSF flow imaging -- phase-contrast MR -- computational fluid dynamics; Nervous system -- Radiography -- Periodicals; Neuroradiography -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.804757
• DOI: 10.1177/1971400918759812
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1971-4009

Abstract

Background: Investigators use phase-contrast magnetic resonance (PC-MR) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to assess cerebrospinal fluid dynamics. We compared qualitative and quantitative results from the two methods. Methods: Four volunteers were imaged with a heavily T2-weighted volume gradient echo scan of the brain and cervical spine at 3T and with PC-MR. Velocities were calculated from PC-MR for each phase in the cardiac cycle. Mean pressure gradients in the PC-MR acquisition through the cardiac cycle were calculated with the Navier-Stokes equations. Volumetric MR images of the brain and upper spine were segmented and converted to meshes. Models of the subarachnoid space were created from volume images with the Vascular Modeling Toolkit. CFD simulations were performed with a previously verified flow solver. The flow patterns, velocities and pressures were compared in PC-MR and CFD flow images. Results: PC-MR images consistently revealed more inhomogeneous flow patterns than CFD, especially in the anterolateral subarachnoid space where spinal nerve roots are located. On average, peak systolic and diastolic velocities in PC-MR exceeded those in CFD by 31% and 41%, respectively. On average, systolic and diastolic pressure gradients calculated from PC-MR exceeded those of CFD by 11% and 39%, respectively. Conclusions: PC-MR shows local flow disturbances that are not evident in typical CFD. The velocities and pressure gradients calculated from PC-MR are systematically larger than those calculated from CFD.