Snelling L K, Helfaer M A, Traystman R J, Rogers M C
Division of Pediatric Critical Care and Applied Physiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510.
Crit Care Med. 1992 Mar;20(3):395-401. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199203000-00017.
Radionuclide cerebral angiography is commonly used as an adjunct to the diagnosis of brain death. Despite its acceptance as a diagnostic tool, it is not clear whether the absence of cerebral blood flow by radionuclide cerebral angiography denotes a complete lack of cerebral blood flow.
To compare cerebral blood flow estimated by radionuclide cerebral angiography with cerebral blood flow measured by the radiolabeled microsphere technique, we systematically varied cerebral perfusion pressure (mean arterial BP minus intracranial pressure) in anesthetized cats by infusing artificial cerebral spinal fluid into the lateral ventricle to increase intracranial pressure. We measured cerebral blood flow with both techniques as cerebral perfusion pressure was decreased from its baseline of 111 +/- 10 mm Hg to 20, 10, 5, 0, and less than 0 mm Hg, causing a stepwise decrease in cerebral blood flow.
We found a correlation by regression analysis (r2 = .47, p less than .05) between radionuclide cerebral angiography and microsphere measurements of cerebral blood flow, when both blood flow measurements were expressed as a percentage of baseline values. However, if 20% of baseline flow was assigned as a cut-off point for critically low cerebral blood flow (based on human studies), radionuclide cerebral angiography was only 33% sensitive to detect critically reduced cerebral blood flow and had a positive predictive accuracy (of low-flow interpretation) of only 60%. Radionuclide cerebral angiography was unable to demonstrate a complete lack of cerebral blood flow, even in two instances when cerebral blood flow by microspheres was less than 0.1% of baseline.
We conclude that the ability of radionuclide cerebral angiography to quantify low cerebral blood flow is poor, and that this technique may not identify severely reduced cerebral blood flow.
放射性核素脑血管造影术通常用作脑死亡诊断的辅助手段。尽管它被公认为一种诊断工具,但通过放射性核素脑血管造影术检测不到脑血流是否就意味着完全没有脑血流尚不清楚。
为了比较放射性核素脑血管造影术估算的脑血流与放射性微球技术测量的脑血流,我们通过向侧脑室内注入人工脑脊液以升高颅内压,从而系统地改变麻醉猫的脑灌注压(平均动脉压减去颅内压)。随着脑灌注压从其111±10 mmHg的基线水平降至20、10、5、0以及低于0 mmHg,导致脑血流逐步减少,我们用这两种技术测量脑血流。
当将两种血流测量值均表示为基线值的百分比时,我们通过回归分析发现放射性核素脑血管造影术与微球法测量的脑血流之间存在相关性(r2 = 0.47,p < 0.05)。然而,如果将20%的基线血流作为严重低脑血流的临界值(基于人体研究),放射性核素脑血管造影术检测严重降低的脑血流的敏感性仅为33%,且其(低血流解读的)阳性预测准确性仅为60%。即使在两例微球法测量的脑血流低于基线值0.1%的情况下,放射性核素脑血管造影术也无法显示完全没有脑血流。
我们得出结论,放射性核素脑血管造影术量化低脑血流的能力较差,且该技术可能无法识别严重减少的脑血流。