Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Getting new auth cookie, if you see this message a lot, tell someone!
EditorialEDITORIALS

Low-Flow Vascular Malformations of the Orbit: A New Approach to a Therapeutic Dilemma

Jonathan S. Lewin
American Journal of Neuroradiology November 2004, 25 (10) 1633-1634;
Jonathan S. Lewin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Low-flow vascular malformations of the head and neck present many challenges for the treating physician. Surgical intervention is often fraught with difficulty, with a high potential for bleeding complications, difficult anatomic dissection, and ultimately a high recurrence rate. These drawbacks have restricted the use of a surgical approach alone to a limited subset of small and well-defined lesions. The highest degree of success has been found when low-flow vascular malformations are treated in a multidisciplinary setting. A key element of this collaborative approach has been image-guided sclerotherapy through the percutaneous injection of ethanol or other sclerosing agents. Image-guided sclerotherapy has proved highly effective, with good to excellent results possible in 75–90% of patients (1). As experts in imaging and percutaneous needle placement, radiologists have taken a central role in the multidisciplinary teams at many institutions, and often drive decisions regarding the type of image guidance, sclerosing agent, and staging of therapy. As the range of modalities within the imaging armamentarium has increased, successful sclerotherapy has been performed with fluoroscopy, duplex sonography, CT, and MR image guidance, with the choice of technique based on the location of the malformation, experience of the radiologist, and availability of technology.

Within the spectrum of head and neck low-vascular malformations, which represent a challenging entity at best, treatment of orbital venolymphatic malformations, as described by Ernemann et al in this issue of the AJNR, presents a distinct challenge due to the severity of potential complications. In particular, the consequences of inadvertent ophthalmic vein thrombosis may be catastrophic and can lead to orbital compartment syndrome, cavernous sinus thrombosis, and loss of vision. While accurate needle insertion and careful monitoring of sclerosant injection is always important, the margin for error in treatment of orbital and periorbital disease is small, and meticulous care is necessary.

Treatment with sclerotherapy can be broken down into several discrete steps, and each may be best performed with a specific imaging technique. One of the most important stages of the sclerotherapy procedure is the preprocedural evaluation of the patient, requiring careful planning of the safest percutaneous approach to the malformation, definition of the anatomic extent of the lesion, identification of critical adjacent neurovascular structures, and when possible, delineation of venous drainage pathways. MR imaging has become the primary technique for therapy planning. Numerous authors have demonstrated the ability of MR imaging to characterize and delineate vascular malformations of the head and neck (2), and specific aspects of the MR imaging appearance have been shown to have prognostic value with regard to percutaneous sclerotherapy (3). Percutaneous puncture of the malformation can be successfully performed with X-ray fluoroscopy, CT, duplex sonography, or MR imaging. The best puncture-guidance technique for an individual lesion depends on the complexity, depth, and size of the malformation, along with the availability of an acoustic window. The next step in sclerotherapy is estimation of the volume of sclerosing agent required for effective treatment, often performed through the monitored injection of contrast agent until the malformation is filled. The final and most critical step in the sclerotherapy procedure is real-time monitoring of the distribution of the sclerosing agent during injection. In particular, in orbital and periorbital malformations such as those described by Dr. Ernemann et al, drainage via the ophthalmic vein must be carefully assessed, and the treating physician must be ready to stop injection quickly should this avenue for venous egress of sclerosant be identified.

The puncture-guidance phase of the procedure can be difficult for orbital lesions, and the use of image fusion and frameless stereotactic guidance for needle placement along with X-ray fluoroscopic monitoring of the injection procedure, as described in the article in this issue of the AJNR, represents a novel solution to the particular challenges of orbital low-flow malformations. Duplex sonography combined with fluoroscopy, a highly successful combination for many head and neck malformations, can be particularly challenging with the complexity, location, and adjacency to bone noted with orbital and periorbital lesions. Dr. Ernemann et al have taken a relatively straightforward technical solution from the operating room and have applied it to one of the more challenging steps in the sclerotherapy procedure in this anatomic location. The spatial accuracy of frameless stereotactic systems, typically around one to two millimeters, is also well suited to the size of the lesion treated. It is possible that the procedure could have been further simplified with the use of MR image data alone, since the size of the lateral orbital wall defect was sufficient to allow easy visualization on the MR images, possibly obviating the need for CT fusion. However, the CT information would likely contribute to the safety and ease of needle placement in lesions with smaller bony defects. The ability of the authors to bring the advantages of MR and CT into the X-ray fluoroscopic suite allowed full advantage of the temporal and spatial resolution of X-ray fluoroscopy for monitoring of potential ophthalmic vein filling, the most critical step in the treatment session.

In contrast to the combination of modalities demonstrated in this current article, recent advances in sclerotherapy have included the modification of a single technique to provide each of these procedural steps. Most notably has been the recent description of MR imaging as a technique for, not only the diagnosis, but also the treatment phase of the sclerotherapy procedure. MR imaging developments have allowed the accurate imaging characteristics typically used for diagnosis and characterization of low-flow vascular malformations to be directly applied for needle puncture, sclerosant volume determination, and sclerosing agent injection monitoring (4), and more recently has been shown to document that a sufficient concentration of sclerosing agent has been attained within the treated malformation during the therapeutic procedure (5). MR imaging has also been shown to monitor temperature within the lesion during treatment, a feature that can be useful when thermal methods of therapy are used for low-flow vascular malformations as an alternative to chemical sclerotherapy (6). However, although real time imaging has steadily been improving with MR imaging and may make a “single-technique” approach feasible for many anatomic sites, the temporal and spatial resolution of these real time MR techniques is still limited as compared with that of X-ray fluoroscopy, and the size and critical nature of ophthalmic vein filling makes this technology less applicable to orbital malformations. The lack of general availability of open MR imaging systems equipped with interventional accessories also provides a barrier to the use of this technology as a stand alone treatment-guidance technique.

In summary, the necessary steps for safe performance of sclerotherapy include precise preprocedural lesion visualization and characterization, accurate needle placement, determination of the correct volume of sclerosing agent for injection, and real time monitoring of venous egress during the injection procedure. In this issue of the AJNR, Dr. Ernemann et al have described a novel method that combines the advantages of MR imaging and CT for accurate needle placement with the unsurpassed temporal and spatial resolution of X-ray fluoroscopy for the monitoring of sclerosant injection, and this strategy should be considered for vascular malformation at various anatomic locations that are difficult to approach with ultrasonography or MR imaging guidance alone. Image fusion, frameless stereotaxy, and computer-assisted device guidance are central to the future of image-guided minimally invasive therapy, and the authors are to be commended for bringing this combination into the realm of low-flow vascular malformation therapy.

References

  1. ↵
    Burrows PE, Mason KP. Percutaneous Treatment of Low Flow Vascular Malformations. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 2004;15:431–445
    PubMed
  2. ↵
    Baker LL, Dillon WP, Hieshima GB, Dowd CF, Frieden IJ. Hemangiomas and vascular malformations of the head and neck: MR characterization. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1993;14:307–314
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Goyal M, Causer PA, Armstrong D. Venous Vascular Malformations in Pediatric Patients: Comparison of Results of Alcohol Sclerotherapy with Proposed MR Imaging Classification. Radiology 2002;223:639–644
    PubMed
  4. ↵
    Lewin JS, Merkle E, Duerk JL, Tarr R. Low-flow vascular malformations in the head and neck: safety and feasibility of MR imaging-guided percutaneous sclerotherapy–preliminary experience with 14 procedures in three patients. Radiology 1999;211:566–570
    PubMed
  5. ↵
    Hayashi N, Masumoto T, Okubo T, et al. Hemangiomas in the Face and Extremities: MR–guided Sclerotherapy—Optimization with Monitoring of Signal Intensity Changes in Vivo. Radiology 2003;226:567–572
    PubMed
  6. ↵
    Wacker FK, Cholewa D, Roggan A, Schilling A, Waldschmidt J, Wolf KJ. Vascular lesions in children: percutaneous MR imaging-guided interstitial Nd:YAG laser therapy–preliminary experience. Radiology. 1998;208(3):789–94
  • Copyright © American Society of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 25 (10)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 25, Issue 10
1 Nov 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Low-Flow Vascular Malformations of the Orbit: A New Approach to a Therapeutic Dilemma
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
Jonathan S. Lewin
Low-Flow Vascular Malformations of the Orbit: A New Approach to a Therapeutic Dilemma
American Journal of Neuroradiology Nov 2004, 25 (10) 1633-1634;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Low-Flow Vascular Malformations of the Orbit: A New Approach to a Therapeutic Dilemma
Jonathan S. Lewin
American Journal of Neuroradiology Nov 2004, 25 (10) 1633-1634;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Coffee Houses and Reading Rooms
  • Teaching Lessons by MR CLEAN
  • Comeback Victory
Show more Editorials

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire