Application of 4D flow MRI for exploring the anatomical and haemodynamic characteristics of pelvic veins and their correlations

1. Introduction

Chronic venous disease (CVD) of the lower extremities is a common clinical syndrome whose incidence increases with age. Patients often present with symptoms such as lower extremity heaviness, lethargy and swelling and signs such as lower extremity varicose veins, lower extremity oedema, skin pigmentation, and venous ulcers. The reason for these symptoms is the development of lower extremity venous stasis caused by various factors, including obstructive factors such as pulmonary hypertension, heart failure, Budd-Chiari syndrome and iliac vein stenosis and regurgitation factors such as tricuspid regurgitation and lower extremity venous valve insufficiency. Clinical studies have found that iliac vein stenosis is an important factor leading to venous reflux disorders in the lower extremities, but it is not clear how it leads to changes in iliac vein haemodynamics. Iliac vein stenosis can be identified and treated in clinical practice, but sometimes these treatments cannot relieve the symptoms of lower extremity venous insufficiency. Therefore, it is clinically important to understand the characteristics of pelvic vein haemodynamics.

4D flow MRI can simultaneously obtain vascular anatomy and haemodynamic information and dynamically display haemodynamic changes, including blood flow velocity, blood flow shear force, and kinetic energy. It can also visualise the direction and state of blood flow in the form of flow diagrams and trace diagrams and aid in quantitatively and qualitatively analysing blood vessels¹, which can help in investigating the causes of vascular disease and the factors affecting disease progression. In addition, by excluding contrast enhancement from 4D flow MRI analysis, its interference on blood flow is excluded, resulting in a more realistic reflection of the haemodynamic state of the body.

We used 4D flow MRI for the first time to investigate the haemodynamic characteristics of the iliac veins in young asymptomatic people. We intend to study baseline pelvic vein anatomy and haemodynamics data and provide a basis for further research on the pathogenesis of CVD of the lower extremities.

2. Method

2.3 Anatomical parameters: vessel area, stenosis rate, common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle, and tortuosity

To determine the vessel area, vessel regions of interest (ROIs) were delineated at the distal end of the inferior vena cava, the proximal end of the bilateral common iliac vein (wherein the proximal end of the left common iliac artery is the distal end of the right common iliac artery crossing the left common iliac vein), and the proximal vessel area of bilateral external iliac vein.

Stenosis rate: We used the area stenosis rate of the vessel in the axial orientation to calculate the vessel stenosis rate. In the axial plane, we measured the areas where the vessel was narrowest (Smin) and widest (Smax) at the distal end of the common iliac vein, attempting to avoid the bifurcation of the common iliac vein and the site where it converges into the inferior vena cava when selecting the largest plane. Then, the vascular stenosis rate was calculated as .

Common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle: Using the postprocessed coronal 4D flow MR images, the angle between the central line of the bilateral common iliac vein and the extension line of the inferior vena cava was measured as the iliac-inferior vena cava angle (Figure 1).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1:

The blue arrow is the IVC, the white arrow is the LCIV, the green arrow is the RCIV. The angles α and β are the angles of the extension lines of the inferior vena cava and central line of right and left common iliac vein.

Tortuosity: The length L between the two ends of the iliac vein and the actual vessel length H were measured and used to define the tortuosity as S=H/L*100%(Figure 2).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2:

Length of iliac vein center line is L and maximum chord height is H

3. Data analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 23.0 statistical package (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Continuous variables are reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (quartile) and categorical variables as frequency or percentage of events. The bivariate Spearman’s test was used for correlation analysis. The relationships among the common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle, stenosis rate, tortuosity, vessel area and iliac vein flow, velocity and pressure difference were analysed. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

4. Results

4.2 The median (interquartile range) of the Villalta score for all lower extremities was 0 (0-0), and the median venous clinical severity score (VCSS) was 0 (Figure 3)

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3:

Histogram of frequency distribution of Villalta and VCSS scores for all sixty limbs.

5. Discussion

Venous stasis in the lower extremities is considered to be an important haemodynamic change in the occurrence and development of CVD. Some studies have reported that the obstruction and reflux disorder of the lower extremities caused by iliac vein stenosis are a reason for venous insufficiency of the lower extremities and the subsequent formation of CVD^{2, 3}. The clinical use of iliac vein stents to correct stenosis has been shown to be effective^4–6, but studies have shown that iliac vein stenosis rates do not exactly match symptom severity⁷. Asymptomatic iliac vein stenosis is a normal anatomical variation rather than a pathological change^{8, 9}.

In recent years, studies have found that abnormal haemodynamics are closely related to the occurrence and development of vascular diseases. The common iliac and external iliac veins are the channels for venous reflux of the lower extremities. We believe that the anatomical parameters of the iliac veins, such as vessel area, stenosis rate, and vessel course, may affect iliac vein haemodynamic parameters, such as flow, velocity, and pressure, which will lead to progression in CVD. In addition, in clinical practice, the prevalence of CVD on the left and right sides has been shown to be inconsistent^{10, 11}, and we hypothesize that this inconsistency is related to a certain degree with the anatomical differences between the bilateral limbs.

At present, the diagnosis and evaluation of vascular diseases are very dependent on imaging data, such as Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), digital subtraction angiography (DSA), and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), but few of the above methods can accurately, objectively and dynamically collect the haemodynamic parameters of the patients. 4D flow MRI has great application prospects in the research of vascular diseases due to its noninvasiveness, lack of radiation, lack of contrast agent enhancement, and wide coverage. It can provide a large number of haemodynamic parameters and visualize blood flow status and changes and allows analysis of postprocessed images offline for retrospectively assessing blood flow parameters¹². The ability of 4D flow MRI to perform qualitative and quantitative analysis allows a comprehensive assessment of pelvic venous blood flow and can help clarify the relationship between haemodynamic changes and the development of CVD. In this paper, 4D flow MRI was first used to collect the anatomical and haemodynamic parameters of the pelvic vein and to explore the anatomical and haemodynamic characteristics of the iliac vein in asymptomatic people and their correlations, providing a reference for further exploring abnormal changes in fluid dynamics.

We measured the anatomical parameters of the iliac vein in asymptomatic individuals and found that the average angle of the common iliac vein as it converged into the inferior vena cava in all limbs was 36.37±21.88°, with average angles on the left and right of 51.67±17.75° and 17.07±6.30° (P<0.001), respectively. The angle at which the left common iliac vein converged into the inferior vena cava was larger than that on the right side. This suggests that it may be more appropriate to choose about 50° for the bevelled opening angle of the iliac vein-specific stent in current clinical practice. The median (interquartile range) tortuosity of all limbs was 14.94% (10.07%-19.70%), among which the mean tortuosity of the left iliac vein was 19.41%±3.32%, and the mean tortuosity of the right iliac vein was 10.94%±2.78%(P<0.001), showing that the tortuosity of the left iliac vein was greater than that of the contralateral side. The course of the right common iliac vessels is steeper and straighter than the left, which is consistent with the research results of Arjun Jayaraj¹³ et al. The tortuosity of the left iliac vein is large, a greater tortuosity requires higher compliance for the middle section of the iliac vein stent, as this would allow better adaptation to the tortuosity of the iliac vein and adherence to the vein wall, suggesting that support and flexibility should be considered when selecting materials for the design of iliac vein stents. Raju¹⁴ et al. used colour Doppler ultrasound to measure the common iliac and external iliac diameters of healthy volunteers, obtaining values of 13.3 (11-15.8) mm and 11.5 (8.7-13.9) mm, respectively; this study found that the average diameters of left and right common iliac veins of the volunteers were 14.02 mm and 12.19 mm, respectively, while the average diameters of the left and right external iliac veins were 13.12 mm and 11.75 mm, respectively, which may also serve as reference values for the design of iliac vein stents.

Iliac vein stenosis is very common worldwide, but most people have iliac vein stenosis without obvious clinical symptoms. Iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS) often occurs in the left lower extremity and is more common in women than in men¹⁵. Kibbe et al.⁸ found that among asymptomatic patients with lower extremity compression, approximately 24% had left common iliac vein compression greater than 50%. In this study, the iliac vein stenosis rate was >50% in 20% (6/30) of the left limbs of all volunteers as measured by 4D flow MRI, consistent with the findings of Kibbe et al. The mean stenosis rate of the left limb was higher than that of the right side (34.04%±13.74% vs. 17.12%±7.33%, P<0.001).

Currently, the relationship between iliac vein anatomy and haemodynamics is unclear. We used 4D flow MRI to measure the mean velocity and blood flow of the bilateral iliac veins and the pressure difference between the external iliac vein and inferior vena cava in an asymptomatic population. This study found significant correlations between iliac vein anatomy and haemodynamic parameters. A larger iliac vein area was correlated with a higher blood flow; a larger common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle was correlated with a lower iliac vein velocity and a higher external iliac-inferior cavity pressure difference. Finally, a greater iliac vein tortuosity was correlated with a lower iliac vein velocity and a higher external iliac vein-inferior vena cava pressure difference.

This study found that an iliac vein stenosis rate of more than 50% affected the blood flow and pressure differences of the iliac vein. Specifically, compared with a stenosis rate of less than 50%, the absolute blood flow of the iliac vein decreased. While the relative blood flow (the difference between the common iliac and external iliac blood flows) decreased, the venous pressure increased, and the average iliac vein velocity decreased. However, none of these differences was significant, suggesting that compensatory velocity acceleration may occur at the site of venous stenosis (Table V). According to Poiseuille’s law, changes in intravascular flow velocity and pressure differences will lead to changes in blood flow. The flow velocity can be compensatorily increased at the site of stenosis and decreased at sites near the stenosis, so the flow velocity does not objectively reflect the status of venous reflux. Another study by our center¹⁶ suggested that changes in the common iliac-external iliac flow difference at the lower extremities, that is, a decrease in relative flow, may be related to the severity of the patient’s symptoms. A low or even negative flow difference may be associated with more severe limb symptoms (higher Villalta scores).

Twenty percent of the volunteers had a left iliac vein stenosis rate of >50% but no symptoms related to lower extremity venous insufficiency (such as varicose veins or oedema). We believe that stenosis can lead to changes in iliac vein haemodynamics, but the reason for the lack of clinical symptoms is related to the fact that although a certain degree of iliac vein stenosis is a physiological anatomical structure, it is also a potential pathological change. The changes in venous flow due to venous stenosis in the normal population may have a “threshold effect”, and a decrease in venous flow may not be sufficient to cause symptoms or signs related to the veins of the lower extremities. Symptoms associated with venous insufficiency of the lower extremity may be induced if the stenosis causes the flow or flow difference to reach this threshold.

After stratified analysis of iliac vein angle and tortuosity, we found that the common iliac vein flow, external iliac vein flow, average common iliac vein velocity, and average external iliac vein flow velocity were all lower in limbs with greater iliac vein angles and tortuosity values, while the external iliac-inferior vena cava pressure difference was higher (Table VI, VII). Compared with those of the right side, the tortuosity and common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle of the left side were larger. The average flow and velocity in the right common and external iliac veins were higher than in the left limb, and the pressure in the left external iliac vein was higher than that in the right side. The average pressure difference between the left external iliac vein and the right external iliac vein was 0.13±0.22 mmHg. We believe that the differences in the bilateral iliac vein tortuosity and venous inflow angle may also be a reason for the difference in haemodynamic parameters of bilateral iliac veins, which can explain why lower extremity venous insufficiency in CVD patients mostly occurs in the left side. Lower extremity venous insufficiency was also more common on the left side in patients with no iliac vein stenosis on angiography. This is closely related to the larger angle of the left common iliac vein as it converges into the inferior vena cava and its larger tortuosity.

6. Conclusion

The anatomical structure of the pelvic vein, including the iliac vein area, common iliac vein-inferior vena cava angle, iliac vein tortuosity, and iliac vein stenosis rate, are important factors that affect the haemodynamic changes in the pelvic vein. There are correlations between parameters related to anatomical structure and haemodynamic changes in the pelvic veins. Differences in the anatomy and haemodynamics of the bilateral pelvic veins may be one of the reasons why the left extremity is more prone to CVD-related symptoms.

7. Limitations

It is important to bear in mind the limitations of this study. First, the sample size of this study was small. Second, our study failed to explain the effect of circadian rhythm, respiratory rate, body position, and exercise on blood flow. In addition, when the participant is in the supine position, the 4D flow MRI scan is not dynamic and may not reflect the anatomic structures when the participant is standing and moving. We also did not acquire measurement data for IVCS patients and older persons as controls. More prospective studies with high quality and larger sample sizes should be designed in the future.