PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 313434

Accuracy of ventricular volume estimation.

D J Wyper·J D Pickard·M Matheson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Sources of error in the estimation of ventricular volume from CAT scans are discussed and the accuracy of the measurement assessed. Two methods of calculating ventricular volume from an intraventricular injection of radioisotope are described and compared. Finally, the CAT scan and isotope methods are compared and contrasted. The error associated with a single measurement of volume by any of these techniques is between 20% and 30%. In patients with no ventricular catheter there is no choice other than to use CAT scanning, but if intraventricular injection is possible this method offers a potentially more accurate volume determination because of his higher signal-to-noise ratio.

Explore related subjects

Cerebral VentriclesCerebral VentriculographyHumansIndiumRadioisotopesRadionuclide ImagingTechnetiumTomography, X-Ray ComputedComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D J Wyper, J D Pickard, M Matheson. 1979. Accuracy of ventricular volume estimation.. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.42.4.345

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Comparison of intracranial pressure measured simultaneously within the brain parenchyma and cerebral ventricles.

We report a 48-year-old man treated for acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) wherein intracranial pressure (ICP) was measured simultaneously within the ventricular cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and the brain parenchyma (PAR). Single pressure waves within the continuous pressure signal were identified with determination of the single wave parameters pulse amplitude (i.e. pressure difference between diastolic minimum pressure and systolic maximum pressure), mean pressure (i.e. mean pressure from beginning to ending minimum diastolic minimum pressure), and latency (i.e. rise time from diastolic minimum pressure to systolic maximum pressure). A total of 218,589 CSF/PAR single pressure wave pairs were analyzed. For these CSF/PAR wave pairs the mean difference in pulse pressure amplitude was -0.13 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.13 to -0.12 mmHg], mean difference in mean single wave pressure -0.71 mmHg (95% CI -0.74 to -0.68 mmHg), and mean difference in latency -0.01 seconds (95% CI -0.01 to -0.01 seconds). Hence, in this patient monitoring ICP within the ventricular CSF or brain parenchyma gave similar results. Moreover, the comparisons of single CSF/PAR wave pulse pressure amplitudes gave no evidence of a pressure gradient from brain parenchyma to the ventricular CSF in this patient.

Cerebral Ventricles↗
PubMed2006

Periventricular nodular heterotopia and Williams syndrome.

We report here on the first case of a child with bilateral periventricular nodular heterotopia (PNH) and Williams syndrome. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses demonstrated a deletion of the elastin gene in the Williams syndrome critical region (WSCR). Further mapping by loss of heterozygosity analysis both by microsatellite marker and SNP profiling demonstrated a 1.5 Mb deletion beyond the telomeric end of the typical WSCR. No mutations were identified in the X-linked filamin-A gene (the most common cause of PNH). These findings suggest another dominant PNH disorder along chromosome 7q11.23.

Cerebral Ventricles↗