Re: question about brain mri does anyone know?
hi niki,i have to say that given your symptoms i am rather suprised that they didn't do this with contrast,thatw as just kind of a stupid thing to do when you are trying to detect any abnormaliteis within the arterial structures.the contrast would have helped alot in highlighting possible problem areas.i just don' get that decision not to use it when you were right there and it was availiable.
the best way to really see the arterial structures without going invasive like with an angiogram,which IS the best possible way to check actual blood flow thru the brain,would be with whats called an MRA.this just highlights strictly the arterial bloodflow by looking at only just the arteries themselves and nothing else there to actually get in the way of seeing everything.all you see on the films is a bunch of arteries,no soft tissue oranything else,so it would be very hard for any vascular abnormalities to actually "hide" behind another structure.
this was the way my aneurysm was actually found.it never showed up on my MRI.it was almost missed on the MRA too only because it is located at a bend in the cerebellar artery and it is also very very close to the junction with the vertebral artery as well.but they DID find it,thank god.
But if you really really do need to actually have the blood flow itself checked,the angiogram would be the test of choice.i am due for my post coiling follow up angio here like right now.i had my aneurysm coiled back in november last fall and now they just do follow up angios to make sure everything is still okay with the coils(they can herniate back out of the anerysm sometimes(don't even want to go there)or to also see if any new fun and exciting aneurysms have deveoped along the way.oh yippie.
what exactly is your doc trying to really look for here anyways?I would definitely discuss the possible MRA,with contrast in order to really get the best possible look without the invasiveness of angio.but that can still be done if needed.by why do that if you dont really have to ya know.they do carry inherent risks.just speak with your doc.
I would start seeing an actual neurosurgeon Vs neurologist as the neurologists just really don't have the overall knowledge and expertise that a NS does of having actually worked within the brain and the spinal cord,ya know?my NSs werealays much more knowledgeable than any of the neurologists I have had to see for continuing issues.they would be able to give you ansers to some questions that most neurologists really have no clue as to how to answer as they have never been there,ya know?if its for anything more than a headache you have,seeing an NS would definitely be much better than yet anther neuologist.thats my opinion anyway and i have had to see plenty of both types of neuros over the years.
i just wanted to ask you too,have you actually had an MRI done on the c spine area as well?there are a couple of nerves that travel down from the head and into the c spine and go down to around the c 8 nerve then loop back up into the head again,so it is defintiely possible to be having what appears to be brain problems but with the cause being a problem in the C spine that is affecting one of those cranials that loop back up.just an FYI.it wouldn't hurt to obtain a c spine MRI when you should have to possibly go back in for either a contrsted MRI or that MRA,they can be done at the same visit without you ever having to actually get out of that tube.they can do one and roll into the next type of test by just changing a few things with the MRI settings.so it would not be any sort of an inconvenience for you to have both done at that same time.like I said,just a thought.
please let me know how things are going and what you find out.Good luck,marcia
11-20-01,placement of hardware for failed fusion
9-22-03,removal of cavernous hemangioma that was inside spinal cord. Neuro damage to L hand L leg and R leg.