Upper extremity non-contrast magnetic resonance venography (MRV) compared to contrast enhanced MRV and ultrasound.
Ruth P Lim, Emma Hornsey, Dinesh Ranatunga, Huming Hao, Julie Smith, Tim Spelman, Jason Chuen, Mark Goodwin
Author Information
Ruth P Lim: Department of Radiology, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia; Department of Radiology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia; Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. Electronic address: ruth.lim@austin.org.au.
Emma Hornsey: Department of Radiology, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia.
Dinesh Ranatunga: Department of Radiology, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia; Department of Radiology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
Huming Hao: Department of Surgery, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia.
Julie Smith: Department of Radiology, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia.
Tim Spelman: Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, 85 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Jason Chuen: Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia; Department of Surgery, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia.
Mark Goodwin: Department of Radiology, Austin Health, PO Box 555, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia; Department of Radiology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
PURPOSE: To assess feasibility, image quality and measured venous caliber of non-contrast MRV (NC-MRV) of central and upper extremity veins, compared to contrast-enhanced MRV (CE-MRV) and ultrasound (US) in healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 10 subjects underwent NC-MRV and CE-MRV at 1.5 T, with comparison to US. Two radiologists evaluated MRI for image quality (IQ) and venous caliber. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: NC-MRV is feasible, with inferior IQ but comparable venous caliber measurements CE-MRV (mean 7.9±4.58 mm vs. 7.83±4.62, p=0.13). Slightly larger upper limb caliber measurements were derived for NC-MRV and CE-MRV compared to US (NC-MRV 5.2±1.8 mm, CE-MRV 4.9±1.6 mm, US 4.5±1.8 mm, both p<0.001).
