Abstract
Conventional venography has long been considered the gold standard for evaluation of the venous system. This exam is performed in an angiography suite using real-time X-ray imaging (fluoroscopy) to visualize intravenously injected iodinated contrast media. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) is a technique that allows depiction of only the venous structures of interest by “subtracting” out the nonvascular structures, such as bone. This greatly improves visualization of intravascular contrast material. Cross-sectional venography, comprised of CT venography and MR venography, has the unique advantage of allowing visualization of any obstructing masses or other extrinsic structures that impact the venous system. The entire central venous system can be evaluated by injection through a central venous catheter or a single peripheral IV at any site using indirect imaging. MRV is the preferred method for evaluation of the central veins because the excellent signal intensity generated by gadolinium agents allows excellent visualization with indirect injection. With time-resolved MRA, the contrast bolus can be visualized passing through the vasculature in real-time manner, which allows excellent evaluation of collateral veins and routes of preferential blood flow. High-spatial resolution imaging can also be performed, allowing accurate characterization of lesions. This chapter discusses conventional and cross-sectional venography with a focus on particular disease processes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Ellis JH, Cohan RH. Reducing the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy: a perspective on the controversies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(6):1544–9.
Sidhu PS, Alikhan R, Ammar T, Quinlan DJ. Lower limb contrast venography: a modified technique for use in thromboprophylaxis clinical trials for the accurate evaluation of deep vein thrombosis. Br J Radiol. 2007;80(959):859–65.
Katz DS, Hon M. Current DVT imaging. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;7(2):55–62.
Won YD, Lee JY, Shin YS, Kim YS, Yoon SA, Kim YS, Hahn ST, Park SC, Kim YO. Small dose contrast venography as venous mapping in predialysis patients. J Vasc Access. 2010;11(2):122–7.
Krishan S, Panditaratne N, Verma R, Robertson R. Incremental value of CT venography combined with pulmonary CT angiography for the detection of thromboembolic disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(5):1065–72.
Ciccotosto C, Goodman LR, Washington L, Quiroz FA. Indirect CT venography following CT pulmonary angiography: spectrum of CT findings. J Thorac Imaging. 2002;17(1):18–27.
Lin YT, Tsai IC, Tsai WL, Chen MC, Lin PC, Chan SW, Chen CC. Comprehensive evaluation of patients suspected with deep vein thrombosis using indirect CT venography with multi-detector row technology: from protocol to interpretation. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;26 Suppl 2:311–22.
Jung SC, Lee W, Chung JW, Jae HJ, Park EA, Jin KN, Shin CI, Park JH. Unusual causes of varicose veins in the lower extremities: CT venographic and Doppler US findings. Radiographics. 2009;29(2):525–36.
Min SK, Kim SY, Park YJ, Lee W, Jung IM, Lee T, Ha J, Kim SJ. Role of three-dimensional computed tomography venography as a powerful navigator for varicose vein surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51(4):893–9.
Ruehm SG, Zimny K, Debatin JF. Direct contrast-enhanced 3D MR venography. Eur Radiol. 2001;11(1):102–12.
Kim CY, Miller Jr MJ, Merkle EM. Time-resolved MR angiography as a useful sequence for assessment of ovarian vein reflux. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(5):W458–63.
Kim CY, Merkle EM. Time-resolved MR angiography of the central veins of the chest. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(5):1581–8.
Müller MA, Mayer D, Seifert B, Marincek B, Willmann JK. Recurrent lower-limb varicose veins: effect of direct contrast-enhanced three-dimensional MR venographic findings on diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions. Radiology. 2008;247(3):887–95.
Butty S, Hagspiel KD, Leung DA, Angle JF, Spinosa DJ, Matsumoto AH. Body MR venography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2002;40(4):899–919.
Prince MR, Zhang HL, Prowda JC, Grossman ME, Silvers DN. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and its impact on abdominal imaging. Radiographics. 2009;29(6):1565–74.
Vogt FM, Herborn CU, Goyen M. MR venography. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2005;13(1):113–29, vi.
Wolpert LM, Rahmani O, Stein B, Gallagher JJ, Drezner AD. Magnetic resonance venography in the diagnosis and management of May-Thurner syndrome. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2002;36(1):51–7.
Demondion X, Herbinet P, Van Sint Jan S, Boutry N, Chantelot C, Cotten A. Imaging assessment of thoracic outlet syndrome. Radiographics. 2006;26(6):1735–50.
Ganeshan A, Upponi S, Hon LQ, Uthappa MC, Warakaulle DR, Uberoi R. Chronic pelvic pain due to pelvic congestion syndrome: the role of diagnostic and interventional radiology. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30(6):1105–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kim, C.Y., Guevara, C.J. (2014). Conventional and Cross-Sectional Venography. In: Mowatt-Larssen, E., Desai, S., Dua, A., Shortell, C. (eds) Phlebology, Vein Surgery and Ultrasonography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01812-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01812-6_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-01811-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-01812-6
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)