Estimating Perfusion Deficits in Acute Stroke Patients Without Perfusion Imaging.
ROC curve
humans
ischemic stroke
linear models
perfusion
Journal
Stroke
ISSN: 1524-4628
Titre abrégé: Stroke
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0235266
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2022
11 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
23
7
2022
medline:
27
10
2022
entrez:
22
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Perfusion weighted imaging (PWI) is critical for determining whether stroke patients presenting in an extended time window are candidates for mechanical thrombectomy. However, PWI is not always available. Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery hyperintense vessels (FHVs) are seen in patients with a PWI lesion. We investigated whether a scale measuring the extent FHV could serve as a surrogate for PWI to determine eligibility for thrombectomy. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) FHV score was developed to quantify the burden of FHV and applied to magnetic resonance imaging scans of stroke patients with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery and perfusion imaging. The NIH-FHV was combined with the diffusion weighted image volume to estimate the diffusion-perfusion mismatch ratio. Linear regression was used to compare PWI volumes and mismatch ratios with estimates from the NIH-FHV score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to test the ability of the NIH-FHV score to identify a significant mismatch. There were 101 patients included in the analysis, of whom 78% had a perfusion deficit detected on PWI with a mean lesion volume of 47 (±59) mL. The NIH-FHV score was strongly associated with the PWI lesion volume ( The NIH-FHV score provides an estimate of the PWI lesion volume and, when combined with diffusion weighted imaging, may be helpful when trying to determine whether there is a clinically relevant diffusion-perfusion mismatch in situations where perfusion imaging is not available. Further studies are needed to validate this approach.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Perfusion weighted imaging (PWI) is critical for determining whether stroke patients presenting in an extended time window are candidates for mechanical thrombectomy. However, PWI is not always available. Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery hyperintense vessels (FHVs) are seen in patients with a PWI lesion. We investigated whether a scale measuring the extent FHV could serve as a surrogate for PWI to determine eligibility for thrombectomy.
METHODS
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) FHV score was developed to quantify the burden of FHV and applied to magnetic resonance imaging scans of stroke patients with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery and perfusion imaging. The NIH-FHV was combined with the diffusion weighted image volume to estimate the diffusion-perfusion mismatch ratio. Linear regression was used to compare PWI volumes and mismatch ratios with estimates from the NIH-FHV score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to test the ability of the NIH-FHV score to identify a significant mismatch.
RESULTS
There were 101 patients included in the analysis, of whom 78% had a perfusion deficit detected on PWI with a mean lesion volume of 47 (±59) mL. The NIH-FHV score was strongly associated with the PWI lesion volume (
CONCLUSIONS
The NIH-FHV score provides an estimate of the PWI lesion volume and, when combined with diffusion weighted imaging, may be helpful when trying to determine whether there is a clinically relevant diffusion-perfusion mismatch in situations where perfusion imaging is not available. Further studies are needed to validate this approach.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35866426
doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.038101
pmc: PMC9613522
mid: NIHMS1822064
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3439-3445Subventions
Organisme : Intramural NIH HHS
ID : ZIA NS003151
Pays : United States
Références
Int J Stroke. 2015 Apr;10(3):348-53
pubmed: 23802548
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;34(1):63-9
pubmed: 22759720
Neuroradiology. 1997 Jun;39(6):406-10
pubmed: 9225318
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Jul;179(1):237-43
pubmed: 12076944
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Feb;36(2):269-74
pubmed: 25190202
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 4;378(1):11-21
pubmed: 29129157
Stroke. 2016 Nov;47(11):2763-2769
pubmed: 27659851
Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct;29(10):5567-5576
pubmed: 30903341
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001 Apr;22(4):632-6
pubmed: 11290469
Front Neurol. 2021 Feb 04;11:623881
pubmed: 33613422
Stroke. 2016 Feb;47(2):424-7
pubmed: 26732567
Stroke. 2019 Dec;50(12):e344-e418
pubmed: 31662037
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 22;378(8):708-718
pubmed: 29364767
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001 Jun-Jul;22(6):1021-9
pubmed: 11415892
Stroke. 2010 Dec;41(12):2817-21
pubmed: 21030699
Stroke. 2019 Mar;50(3):618-625
pubmed: 30727856
Neurology. 2000 Jul 25;55(2):265-9
pubmed: 10908902
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001 Sep;22(8):1534-42
pubmed: 11559501
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Aug;36(8):1426-30
pubmed: 25977482
Neurology. 2009 Mar 31;72(13):1134-9
pubmed: 19211928
Acad Radiol. 2012 Oct;19(10):1225-32
pubmed: 22818791
Front Neurol. 2017 Oct 13;8:539
pubmed: 29081762
Neurology. 2001 May 8;56(9):1248-9
pubmed: 11342705
Radiology. 1985 Feb;154(2):443-50
pubmed: 3966131
Acta Radiol. 2016 May;57(5):580-6
pubmed: 26124459
Eur Radiol. 2019 Sep;29(9):4879-4888
pubmed: 30762112
Neuroradiology. 1999 May;41(5):342-6
pubmed: 10379591
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001 Jun;13(6):987-90
pubmed: 11382964