Neurocritical Care

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 241–252 | Cite as

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Current Evidence and Future Directions

  • Sarah E. NelsonEmail author
  • Haris I. Sair
  • Robert D. Stevens
Original Article



Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is associated with an unacceptably high mortality and chronic disability in survivors, underscoring a need to validate new approaches for treatment and prognosis. The use of advanced imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in particular, could help address this gap given its versatile capacity to quantitatively evaluate and map changes in brain anatomy, physiology and functional activation. Yet there is uncertainty about the real value of brain MRI in the clinical setting of aSAH.


In this review, we discuss current and emerging MRI research in aSAH. PubMed was searched from inception to June 2017, and additional studies were then chosen on the basis of relevance to the topics covered in this review.


Available studies suggest that brain MRI is a feasible, safe, and valuable testing modality. MRI detects brain abnormalities associated with neurologic examination, outcomes, and aneurysm treatment and thus has the potential to increase knowledge of aSAH pathophysiology as well as to guide management and outcome prediction. Newer pulse sequences have the potential to reveal structural and physiological changes that could also improve management of aSAH.


Research is needed to confirm the value of MRI-based biomarkers in clinical practice and as endpoints in clinical trials, with the goal of improving outcome for patients with aSAH.


Subarachnoid hemorrhage Magnetic resonance imaging Systematic review 


Compliance with Ethical Standards


This study received no funding.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Zacharia BE, Hickman ZL, Grobelny BT, et al. Epidemiology of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2010;21:221–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carpenter KLH, Czosnyka M, Jalloh I, et al. Systemic, local, and imaging biomarkers of brain injury: more needed, and better use of those already established? Front Neurol. 2015;6:1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Oliveira Manoel AL, Mansur A, Murphy A, et al. Aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage from a neuroimaging perspective. Crit Care. 2014;18:557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Soher BJ, Dale BM, Merkle EM. A review of MR physics: 3T versus 1.5T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2007;15:277–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bitar R, Leung G, Perng R, et al. MR pulse sequences: what every radiologist wants to know but is afraid to ask. RadioGraphics. 2006;26:513–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hirano T. Searching for salvageable brain: the detection of ischemic penumbra using various imaging modalities? J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014;23:795–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brix G, Nekolla EA, Borowski M, et al. Radiation risk and protection of patients in clinical SPECT/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(Suppl 1):S125–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marshall SA, Kathuria S, Nyquist P, et al. Noninvasive imaging techniques in the diagnosis and management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2010;21:305–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Expert Panel on MR Safety, Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, et al. ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:501–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hennemeyer CT, Wicklow K, Feinberg DA, et al. In vitro evaluation of platinum Guglielmi detachable coils at 3 T with a porcine model: safety issues and artifacts. Radiology. 2001;219:732–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khursheed F, Rohlffs F, Suzuki S, et al. Artifact quantification and tractography from 3T MRI after placement of aneurysm clips in subarachnoid hemorrhage patients. BMC Med Imaging. 2011;11:19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hadeishi H, Suzuki A, Yasui N, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2002;50:741–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wani AA, Phadke R, Behari S, et al. Role of diffusion-weighted MRG in predicting outcome in subarachnoid hemorrhage due to anterior communicating artery aneurysms. Turk Neurosurg. 2008;18:10–6.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sato K, Shimizu H, Fujimura M, et al. Acute-stage diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting outcome of poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2010;30:1110–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De Marchis GM, Filippi CG, Guo X, et al. Brain injury visible on early MRI after subarachnoid hemorrhage might predict neurological impairment and functional outcome. Neurocrit Care. 2015;22:74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Frontera JA, Ahmed W, Zach V, et al. Acute ischaemia after subarachnoid haemorrhage, relationship with early brain injury and impact on outcome: a prospective quantitative MRI study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2015;86:71–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Connolly ES, Rabinstein AA, Carhuapoma JR, et al. Guidelines for the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/american Stroke Association. Stroke. 2012;43:1711–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Imaizumi T, Chiba M, Honma T, et al. Detection of hemosiderin deposition by T2*-weighted MRI after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2003;34:1693–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vannemreddy P, Nanda A, Kelley R, et al. Delayed diagnosis of intracranial aneurysms: confounding factors in clinical presentation and the influence of misdiagnosis on outcome. South Med J. 2001;94:1108–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kowalski RG, Claassen J, Kreiter KT, et al. Initial misdiagnosis and outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage. JAMA. 2004;291:866–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vermeulen MJ, Schull MJ. Missed diagnosis of subarachnoid hemorrhage in the emergency department. Stroke. 2007;38:1216–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Inagawa T. Delayed diagnosis of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in patients: a community-based study. J Neurosurg. 2011;115:707–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Siddiq F, Chaudhry SA, Tummala RP, et al. Factors and outcomes associated with early and delayed aneurysm treatment in subarachnoid hemorrhage patients in the United States. Neurosurgery. 2012;71:670–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Noguchi K, Ogawa T, Inugami A, et al. Acute subarachnoid hemorrhage: MR imaging with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery pulse sequences. Radiology. 1995;196:773–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shimoda M, Hoshikawa K, Shiramizu H, et al. Problems with diagnosis by fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging in patients with acute aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2010;50:530–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    da Rocha AJ, da Silva CJ, Gama HPP, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging sequences with computed tomography to detect low-grade subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30:295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mitchell P, Wilkinson ID, Hoggard N, et al. Detection of subarachnoid haemorrhage with magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;70:205–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu Z, Li S, Lei J, An D, Haacke EM. Evaluation of traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage using susceptibility-weighted imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2010;31:1302–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verma RK, Kottke R, Andereggen L, et al. Detecting subarachnoid hemorrhage: comparison of combined FLAIR/SWI versus CT. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:1539–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mulé S, Soize S, Benaissa A, et al. Detection of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage 3 months after initial bleeding: evaluation of T2* and FLAIR MR sequences at 3 T in comparison with initial non-enhanced CT as a gold standard. J Neurointerv Surg. 2016;8:813–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Inoue T, Takada S, Shimizu H, et al. Signal changes on T2*-weighted magnetic resonance imaging from the acute to chronic phases in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013;36:421–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hodel J, Aboukais R, Dutouquet B, et al. Double inversion recovery MR sequence for the detection of subacute subarachnoid hemorrhage. Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36:251–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bendel P, Koivisto T, Könönen M. MR imaging of the brain 1 year after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: randomized study comparing surgical with endovascular treatment1. Radiology. 2008;246:543–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bendel P, Koivisto T, Hänninen T, et al. Subarachnoid hemorrhage is followed by temporomesial volume loss: MRI volumetric study. Neurology. 2006;67:575–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bendel P, Koivisto T, Äikiä M, et al. Atrophic enlargement of CSF volume after subarachnoid hemorrhage: correlation with neuropsychological outcome. Am J Neuroradiol. 2010;31:370–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Falter B, Wiesmann M, Freiherr J, et al. Frequency and appearance of hemosiderin depositions after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage treated by endovascular therapy. Neuroradiology. 2015;57:999–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    van der Kleij LA, De Vis JB, Olivot J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2017;48:239–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jabbarli R, Reinhard M, Niesen W-D, et al. Predictors and impact of early cerebral infarction after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Eur J Neurol. 2015;22:941–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schmidt JM, Rincon F, Fernandez A, et al. Cerebral infarction associated with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurocrit Care. 2007;7:10–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    de Bresser J, Schaafsma JD, Luitse MJA, et al. Quantification of structural cerebral abnormalities on MRI 18 months after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in patients who received endovascular treatment. Neuroradiology. 2015;57:269–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Maher M, Churchill NW, De Oliveira Manoel AL, et al. Altered resting-state connectivity within executive networks after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    De Bresser J, Vincken KL, Kaspers AJ, et al. Quantification of cerebral volumes on MRI 6 months after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2012;43:2782–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Koivisto T, Vanninen R, Hurskainen H, et al. Outcomes of early endovascular versus surgical treatment of ruptured cerebral aneurysms. A prospective randomized study. Stroke. 2000;31:2369–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bendel P, Koivisto T, Niskanen E, et al. Brain atrophy and neuropsychological outcome after treatment of ruptured anterior cerebral artery aneurysms: a voxel-based morphometric study. Neuroradiology. 2009;51:711–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mayer TE, Dichgans M, Straube A, et al. Continuous intra-arterial nimodipine for the treatment of cerebral vasospasm. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008;31:1200–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ferguson S, Macdonald RL. Predictors of cerebral infarction in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2007;60:658–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Juvela S, Siironen J. Early cerebral infarction as a risk factor for poor outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19:332–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rosenberg NF, Liebling SM, Kosteva AR, et al. Infarct volume predicts delayed recovery in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage and severe neurological deficits. Neurocrit Care. 2013;19:293–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tam AKH, Kapadia A, Ilodigwe D, et al. Impact of global cerebral atrophy on clinical outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg. 2013;119:198–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hadjivassiliou M, Tooth CL, Romanowski CA, et al. Aneurysmal SAH: cognitive outcome and structural damage after clipping or coiling. Neurology. 2001;56:1672–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Dumont AS, Crowley RW, Monteith SJ, et al. Endovascular treatment or neurosurgical clipping of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: effect on angiographic vasospasm, delayed ischemic neurological deficit, cerebral infarction, and clinical outcome. Stroke. 2010;41:2519–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hohlrieder M, Spiegel M, Hinterhoelzl J, et al. Cerebral vasospasm and ischaemic infarction in clipped and coiled intracranial aneurysm patients. Eur J Neurol. 2002;9:389–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Molyneux AJ, Birks J, Clarke A, et al. The durability of endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping of ruptured cerebral aneurysms: 18 year follow-up of the UK cohort of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT). Lancet (London, England). 2015;385:691–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Spetzler RF, McDougall CG, Zabramski JM, et al. The barrow ruptured aneurysm trial: 6-year results. J Neurosurg. 2015;123:609–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vatter H, Guresir E, Berkefeld J, et al. Perfusion-diffusion mismatch in MRI to indicate endovascular treatment of cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid haemorrhage. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2011;82:876–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kamran M, Downer J, Corkill R, et al. Non-invasive assessment of vasospasm following aneurysmal SAH using C-arm FDCT parenchymal blood volume measurement in the neuro-interventional suite: technical feasibility. Interv Neuroradiol. 2015;21:479–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rodriguez-Régent C, Hafsa M, Turc G, et al. Early quantitative CT perfusion parameters variation for prediction of delayed cerebral ischemia following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:2956–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Leclerc X, Fichten A, Gauvrit JY, et al. Symptomatic vasospasm after subarachnoid haemorrhage: assessment of brain damage by diffusion and perfusion-weighted MRI and single-photon emission computed tomography. Neuroradiology. 2002;44:610–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rordorf G, Koroshetz WJ, Copen WA, et al. Diffusion- and perfusion-weighted imaging in vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 1999;30:599–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hertel F, Walter C, Bettag M, et al. Perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in patients with vasospasm: a useful new tool in the management of patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2005;56:28–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Beck J, Raabe A, Lanfermann H, et al. Effects of balloon angioplasty on perfusion- and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging results and outcome in patients with cerebral vasospasm. J Neurosurg. 2006;105:220–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ohtonari T, Kakinuma K, Kito T, et al. Diffusion-perfusion mismatch in symptomatic vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2008;48:331–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Grandin CB, Cosnard G, Hammer F, et al. Vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage: diagnosis with MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2000;21:1611–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hacein-Bey L, Provenzale JM. Current imaging assessment and treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:32–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lavoie P, Gariepy JL, Milot G, et al. Residual flow after cerebral aneurysm coil occlusion: diagnostic accuracy of MR angiography. Stroke. 2012;43:740–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Shang S, Ye J, Luo X, et al. Follow-up assessment of coiled intracranial aneurysms using zTE MRA as compared with TOF MRA: a preliminary image quality study. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:4271–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Qiao Y, Steinman DA, Qin Q, et al. Intracranial arterial wall imaging using three-dimensional high isotropic resolution black blood MRI at 3.0 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34:22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Guan J, Karsy M, McNally S, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of intracranial aneurysms treated by flow diversion. Interdiscip Neurosurg Adv Tech Case Manag. 2017;10:69–74.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Jungreis CA, Jannetta PJ, Yonas H. Timing treatment of a giant intracranial aneurysm by the use of magnetic resonance imaging for the determination of intraluminal clot stability. Skull Base Surg. 1993;3:32–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    De Gast AN, Sprengers ME, Van Rooij WJ, et al. Midterm clinical and magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of large and giant carotid artery aneurysms after therapeutic carotid artery occlusion. Neurosurgery. 2007;60:1025–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Toni F, Marliani AF, Cirillo L, et al. 3T MRI in the evaluation of brain aneurysms treated with flow-diverting stents: preliminary experience. Neuroradiol J. 2009;22:588–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Matouk CC, Mandell DM, Günel M, et al. Vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging identifies the site of rupture in patients with multiple intracranial aneurysms: proof of principle. Neurosurgery. 2013;72:492–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Nagahata S, Nagahata M, Obara M, et al. Wall enhancement of the intracranial aneurysms revealed by magnetic resonance vessel wall imaging using three-dimensional turbo spin-echo sequence with motion-sensitized driven-equilibrium: a sign of ruptured aneurysm? Clin Neuroradiol. 2016;26:277–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Wang G, Wen L, Lei S, et al. Wall enhancement ratio and partial wall enhancement on MRI associated with the rupture of intracranial aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg. Epub 2017.:neurintsurg-2017-013308.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fernández-Seara MA, Edlow BL, Hoang A, et al. Minimizing acquisition time of arterial spin labeling at 3T. Magn Reson Med. 2008;59:1467–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Chen Y, Wang DJJ, Detre JA. Test-retest reliability of arterial spin labeling with common labeling strategies. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33:940–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Liu AA, Voss HU, Dyke JP, et al. Arterial spin labeling and altered cerebral blood flow patterns in the minimally conscious state. Neurology. 2011;77:1518–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Günther M. Perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40:269–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Nelson S, Edlow BL, Wu O, et al. Default mode network perfusion in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurocrit Care. 2016;25:237–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Detre JA, Leigh JS, Williams DS, et al. Perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1992;23:37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Essig M, Shiroishi MS, Nguyen TB, et al. Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Aoyama K, Fushimi Y, Okada T, et al. Detection of symptomatic vasospasm after subarachnoid haemorrhage: initial findings from single time-point and serial measurements with arterial spin labelling. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:2382–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Kelly ME, Rowland MJ, Okell TW, et al. Pseudo-continuous arterial spin labelling MRI for non-invasive, whole-brain, serial quantification of cerebral blood flow following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Transl Stroke Res. 2013;4:710–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Labriffe M, Ter Minassian A, Pasco-Papon A, et al. Feasibility and validity of monitoring subarachnoid hemorrhage by a noninvasive MRI imaging perfusion technique: pulsed arterial spin labeling (PASL). J Neuroradiol. 2015;42:358–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Deibler AR, Pollock JM, Kraft RA, et al. Arterial spin-labeling in routine clinical practice, part 2: hypoperfusion patterns. Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1235–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Deibler AR, Pollock JM, Kraft RA, et al. Arterial spin-labeling in routine clinical practice, part 3: hyperperfusion patterns. Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1428–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Lu H, Hua J, van Zijl PCM. Noninvasive functional imaging of cerebral blood volume with vascular-space-occupancy (VASO) MRI. NMR Biomed. 2013;26:932–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Forster BB, MacKay AL, Whittall KP, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging: the basics of blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) imaging. Can Assoc Radiol J. 1998;49:320–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ogawa S, Lee TM, Kay AR, et al. Brain magnetic resonance imaging with contrast dependent on blood oxygenation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1990;87:9868–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    da Costa L, Fierstra J, Fisher JA, et al. BOLD MRI and early impairment of cerebrovascular reserve after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40:972–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ellmore TM, Rohlffs F, Khursheed F. fMRI of working memory impairment after recovery from subarachnoid hemorrhage. Front Neurol. 2013;4:179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Lu H, van Zijl PCM. Experimental measurement of extravascular parenchymal BOLD effects and tissue oxygen extraction fractions using multi-echo VASO fMRI at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Magn Reson Med. 2005;53:808–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Cheng Y, van Zijl PCM, Hua J. Measurement of parenchymal extravascular R2* and tissue oxygen extraction fraction using multi-echo vascular space occupancy MRI at 7 T. NMR Biomed. 2015;28:264–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Hua J, Stevens RD, Huang AJ, et al. Physiological origin for the BOLD poststimulus undershoot in human brain: vascular compliance versus oxygen metabolism. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011;31:1599–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Soares JM, Marques P, Alves V, et al. A hitchhiker’s guide to diffusion tensor imaging. Front Neurosci. 2013;7:31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Yeo SS, Choi BY, Chang CH, et al. Evidence of corticospinal tract injury at midbrain in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2012;43:2239–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Jang SH, Choi BY, Kim SH, et al. Injury of the mammillothalamic tract in patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage: a retrospective diffusion tensor imaging study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e005613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Fragata I, Alves M, Papoila AL, et al. Early prediction of delayed ischemia and functional outcome in acute subarachnoid hemorrhage: role of diffusion tensor imaging. Stroke. 2017;48:2091–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Brooke NS, Ouwerkerk R, Adams CB, et al. Phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectra reveal prolonged intracellular acidosis in the brain following subarachnoid hemorrhage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994;91:1903–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Macmillan CSA, Wild JM, Wardlaw JM, et al. Traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage: in vivo occult pathology demonstrated by magnetic resonance spectroscopy may not be “ischaemic”. A primary study and review of the literature. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2002;144:853–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Wagner M, Jurcoane A, Hildebrand C, et al. Metabolic changes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage apart from perfusion deficits: neuronal mitochondrial injury? Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34:1535–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah E. Nelson
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Haris I. Sair
    • 4
  • Robert D. Stevens
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care MedicineJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of NeurosurgeryJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Departments of RadiologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations