Dismantling the ability of CT and MRI to identify the target mismatch profile in patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion beyond six hours from symptom onset.
Ischemic stroke
Large vessel occlusion
Stroke
Thrombectomy
Journal
Emergency radiology
ISSN: 1438-1435
Titre abrégé: Emerg Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9431227
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
09
12
2018
accepted:
15
03
2019
pubmed:
1
4
2019
medline:
21
1
2020
entrez:
1
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patients with large vessel occlusion and target mismatch on imaging may be thrombectomy candidates in the extended time window. However, the ability of imaging modalities including non-contrast CT Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomographic Scoring (CT ASPECTS), CT angiography collateral score (CTA-CS), diffusion-weighted MRI ASPECTS (DWI ASPECTS), DWI lesion volume, and DWI volume with clinical deficit (DWI + NIHSS), to identify mismatch is unknown. We defined target mismatch as core infarct (DWI volume) of < 70 mL, mismatch volume (tissue with TMax > 6 s) of ≥ 15 mL, and mismatch ratio of ≥ 1.8. Using experimental dismantling design, ability to identify this profile was determined for each imaging modality independently (phase 1) and then with knowledge from preceding modalities (phase 2). We used a generalized mixed model assuming binary distribution with PROC GLIMMIX/SAS for analysis. We identified 32 patients with anterior circulation occlusions, presenting > 6 h from symptom onset, with National Institute of Health Stroke Scale of ≥ 6, who had CT and MR before thrombectomy. Sensitivities for identifying target mismatch increased modestly from 88% for NCCT to 91% with the addition of CTA-CS, and up to 100% for all MR-based modalities. Significant gains in specificity were observed from successive tests (29, 19, and 16% increase for DWI ASPECTS, DWI volume, and DWI + NIHSS, respectively). The combination of NCCT ASPECTS and CTA-CS has high sensitivity for identifying the target mismatch in the extended time window. However, there are gains in specificity with MRI-based imaging, potentially identifying treatment candidates who may have been excluded based on CT imaging alone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30929145
doi: 10.1007/s10140-019-01686-z
pii: 10.1007/s10140-019-01686-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
401-408Références
Stroke. 2011 Aug;42(8):2206-11
pubmed: 21778444
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012 Aug;33(7):1331-6
pubmed: 22383238
Stroke. 2013 Dec;44(12):3565-7
pubmed: 24092549
J Neurointerv Surg. 2014 May;6(4):256-9
pubmed: 24335853
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 May;35(5):884-90
pubmed: 24371030
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):11-20
pubmed: 25517348
Stroke. 2015 Feb;46(2):407-12
pubmed: 25538199
Radiology. 2015 May;275(2):510-20
pubmed: 25633505
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1009-18
pubmed: 25671797
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1019-30
pubmed: 25671798
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Jul;36(7):1272-6
pubmed: 25836727
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2285-95
pubmed: 25882376
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2296-306
pubmed: 25882510
Stroke. 2015 Oct;46(10):3020-35
pubmed: 26123479
Stroke. 2015 Sep;46(9):2510-6
pubmed: 26251252
Stroke. 2016 Jun;47(6):1466-72
pubmed: 27125526
Lancet Neurol. 2016 Oct;15(11):1138-47
pubmed: 27567239
Emerg Radiol. 2017 Apr;24(2):183-193
pubmed: 27718098
Stroke. 2017 Apr;48(4):963-969
pubmed: 28235960
J Neurol Sci. 2017 Apr 15;375:395-400
pubmed: 28320175
Int J Stroke. 2017 Aug;12(6):641-652
pubmed: 28569123
Int J Stroke. 2017 Oct;12(8):896-905
pubmed: 28946832
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 4;378(1):11-21
pubmed: 29129157
Emerg Radiol. 2018 Dec;25(6):659-672
pubmed: 29980872
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Jun;11(6):559-562
pubmed: 30368472