Detection of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis by magnetic resonance non-contrast thrombus imaging

Use of Magnetic Resonance Direct Thrombus Imaging for the Diagnostic Management of Suspected Thrombosis in Routine Clinical Practice

Background  The noninvasive magnetic resonance direct thrombus imaging (MRDTI) technique can be used to diagnose acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT), without the use of intravenous contrast. MRDTI holds the potential to differentiate between acute and chronic DVT and could be helpful when diagnosing thrombosis is challenging. Objectives  Our objective was to evaluate the application of MRDTI in clinical practice, including the frequency and indications of MRDTI scans performed in practice-based conditions, results, impact on treatment decisions, and associated patient outcomes. Methods  A retrospective study was performed at the Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands. MRDTI scans performed since its implementation in patients aged ≥18 years as part of clinical practice for the diagnostic management of suspected thrombosis were evaluated. Results  Between October 2015 and September 2023, 36 patients had undergone MRDTI for the diagnostic evaluation of thrombosis. MRDTI application increased since 2019 (five-eight scans per year). The most common indication was to differentiate between acute and chronic thrombosis, mainly for suspected recurrent ipsilateral DVT after inconclusive compression ultrasonography. In over a third of patients, acute thrombosis was confirmed by MRDTI. MRDTI results determined treatment decisions in all except two patients. One patient had symptomatic thrombosis of the lower extremity within 3 months after an MRDTI of the upper extremity without signs of acute thrombosis (1/23; 4.3%, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-21). Conclusion  Over the past 4 years, MRDTI has been used increasingly in our hospital. MRDTI results guided treatment decisions, which confirms the clinical impact and feasibility of its application in daily practice.

Modern imaging of acute pulmonary embolism

The first-choice imaging test for visualization of thromboemboli in the pulmonary vasculature in patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is multidetector computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) - a readily available and widely used imaging technique. Through technological advancements over the past years, alternative imaging techniques for the diagnosis of PE have become available, whilst others are still under investigation. In particular, the evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to enable further innovation in diagnostic management of PE. In this narrative review, current CTPA techniques and the emerging technology photon-counting CT (PCCT), as well as other modern imaging techniques of acute PE are discussed, including CTPA with iodine maps based on subtraction or dual-energy acquisition, single-photon emission CT (SPECT), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and magnetic resonance direct thrombus imaging (MRDTI). Furthermore, potential applications of AI are discussed.

[Translation into French and republication of: "Central venous catheter associated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: Diagnosis and therapeutic management"]

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a relatively frequent and potentially fatal complication arising in patients with cancer who require a central catheter placement for intravenous treatment. In everyday practice, CRT remains a challenge for management; despite its frequency and its negative clinical impact, few data are available concerning diagnosis and treatment of CRT. In particular, no diagnostic studies or clinical trials have been published that included exclusively patients with cancer and a central venous catheter (CVC). For this reason, many questions regarding optimal management of CRT remain unanswered. Due to the paucity of high-grade evidence regarding CRT in cancer patients, guidelines are derived from upper extremity DVT studies for diagnosis, and from those for lower limb DVT for treatment. This article addresses the issues of diagnosis and management of CRT through a review of the available literature and makes a number of proposals based on the available evidence. In symptomatic patients, venous ultrasound is the most appropriate choice for first-line diagnostic imaging of CRT because it is noninvasive, and its diagnostic performance is high (which is not the case in asymptomatic patients). In the absence of direct comparative clinical trials, we suggest treating patients with CRT with a therapeutic dose of either a LMWH or a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, with or without a loading dose. These anticoagulants should be given for a total of at least 3 months, including at least 1 month after catheter removal following initiation of therapy.

Central venous catheter associated upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients: Diagnosis and therapeutic management

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a relatively frequent and potentially fatal complication arising in patients with cancer who require a central catheter placement for intravenous treatment. In everyday practice, CRT remains a challenge for management; despite its frequency and its negative clinical impact, few data are available concerning diagnosis and treatment of CRT. In particular, no diagnostic studies or clinical trials have been published that included exclusively patients with cancer and a central venous catheter (CVC). For this reason, many questions regarding optimal management of CRT remain unanswered. Due to the paucity of high-grade evidence regarding CRT in cancer patients, guidelines are derived from upper extremity DVT studies for diagnosis, and from those for lower limb DVT for treatment. This article addresses the issues of diagnosis and management of CRT through a review of the available literature and makes a number of proposals based on the available evidence. In symptomatic patients, venous ultrasound is the most appropriate choice for first-line diagnostic imaging of CRT because it is noninvasive, and its diagnostic performance is high (which is not the case in asymptomatic patients). In the absence of direct comparative clinical trials, we suggest treating patients with CRT with a therapeutic dose of either a LMWH or a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor, with or without a loading dose. These anticoagulants should be given for a total of at least three months, including at least one month after catheter removal following initiation of therapy.

Diffuse generalized venulitis as the primary pathology of Behçet's disease: A comprehensive magnetic resonance venography study

OBJECTIVE

Behçet's Disease (BD) is a chronic multisystem vasculitis that manifests with destructive inflammation affecting the eyes, central nervous system, and blood vessels. The pathology of vein involvement in BD is poorly characterized. Magnetic resonance (MR) venography gives more comprehensive information about deep veins and adjacent tissues. In this study, we aimed to characterize vein involvement and evaluate the diagnostic utility of MR venography in BD.

METHODS

Sixty-five BD patients who fulfilled the International Study Group (ISG) criteria and 20 healthy control subjects were enrolled. Inferior vena cava (IVC), common iliac veins (CIV), external (EIV) and internal iliac veins (IVV), common femoral veins (CFV), femoral veins (FV), and greater saphenous veins (GSV) of BD patients and healthy controls were evaluated with MR venography and ultrasonography for the presence pathologic features, luminal thrombi, vessel wall changes, and perivascular abnormalities.

RESULTS

33 vascular and 32 non-vascular BD patients (mean age 39.3 ± 11.3 years and 48 [73.8%] male) were enrolled. MR venography revealed diffuse concentric thickening of the walls of IVC, CIV, EIV, IIV, CFV, FV, and GSV in BD (healthy controls vs. BD p<0.05 for all vein segments). MR venography provided additional information about veins and perivascular tissues like contrast enhancement, enlarged lymph nodes, and seminal vesicle vascularization, which were remarkably more frequent in vascular BD than non-vascular BD and healthy controls.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that the involvement of the venous system is diffuse and generalized in BD, and demonstration of venulitis might help diagnose the disease.

Detection of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis by magnetic resonance non-contrast thrombus imaging

BACKGROUND

Compression ultrasonography (CUS) is the first-line imaging test for diagnosing upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT), but often yields inconclusive test results. Contrast venography is still considered the diagnostic standard but is an invasive technique.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging (MR-NCTI) for the diagnosis of UEDVT.

METHODS

In this international multicenter diagnostic study, we prospectively included patients with clinically suspected UEDVT who were managed according to a diagnostic algorithm that included a clinical decision rule (CDR), D-dimer test, and diagnostic imaging. UEDVT was confirmed by CUS or (computed tomography [CT]) venography. UEDVT was excluded by (1) an unlikely CDR and normal D-dimer, (2) a normal serial CUS or (3) a normal (CT) venography. Within 48 h after the final diagnosis was established, patients underwent MR-NCTI. MR-NCTI images were assessed post hoc by two independent radiologists unaware of the presence or absence of UEDVT. The sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement of MR-NCTI for UEDVT were determined.

RESULTS

Magnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging demonstrated UEDVT in 28 of 30 patients with UEDVT and was normal in all 30 patients where UEDVT was ruled out, yielding a sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 78-99) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 88-100). The interobserver agreement of MR-NCTI had a kappa value of 0.83 (95% CI 0.69-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance noncontrast thrombus imaging is an accurate and reproducible method for diagnosing UEDVT. Clinical outcome studies should determine whether MR-NCTI can replace venography as the second-line imaging test in case of inconclusive CUS.