Background Cerebral venous sinus stenting is an established treatment for patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), refractory to medical management and with stenotic venous sinus on conventional cerebral venography. Currently, there are no clear guidelines on optimal noninvasive imaging modality for routine post-stenting follow-up. We investigated diagnostic yield of CT venography (CTV) for evaluation of stent patency.
Methods We reviewed our clinical database of patients with a diagnosis of IIH, who underwent stenting of stenotic transverse or transverse/sigmoid sinus junction. Patients who had follow-up CTVs after more than 30 days were included in the final study group. All CTVs were reviewed by two readers for in-stent thrombosis, extrinsic stent compression, juxta-stent stenosis, and new contralateral venous sinus stenosis. Inter-observer agreement and association of stent patency with clinical outcomes (headache and papilledema) were assessed.
Results In all 36 included patients with 38 cerebral venograms for stenting, follow-up CTVs demonstrated adequate opacifications of the venous sinuses and stents for confident evaluation for in-stent thrombosis, extrinsic stent compression, juxta-stent stenosis, and new contralateral venous sinus stenosis, with inter-observer agreement coefficient of 0.7, 1.0, 0.8, and 1.0 respectively. Association between abnormal CTV and higher rates of persistent headache and lower rates of headache improvement/resolution was statistically significant (P-value of 0.01).
Conclusion CTV is a reliable noninvasive imaging modality for evaluation of cerebral venous sinuses and stent patency following treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension with venous sinus stenting and could be used as a routine follow-up study.
- intracranial pressure
- CT angiography
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. All data relevant to the study are included in the article.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors DPS performed data gathering, wrote original and revised drafts. GL participated in manuscript review, revisions, and data gathering. PPM participated in manuscript review and revisions. ART performed data gathering. WB participated in manuscript review, revisions, and performed statistical analysis.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.