BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The identification of the tissue at risk for infarction remains challenging in stroke patients. In this study, we evaluated the value of quantitative cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cerebral blood volume (CBV) measurements in the prediction of infarct growth in hyperacute stroke. METHODS: Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR), diffusion-weighted (DW), and gradient-echo echo-planar perfusion-weighted (PW) sequences were obtained in 66 patients within 6 hours of stroke onset; ischemia was confirmed on follow-up FLAIR images. We delineated the following: (1) the initial infarct on DW images, (2) the area of hemodynamic disturbance on mean transit time (MTT) maps, and (3) the final infarct on follow-up FLAIR images. MTT, CBF, and CBV were calculated in the following areas: area of initial infarct (INF), area of infarct growth (IGR, final minus initial infarct), the hemodynamically disturbed area that remained viable (OLI, hemodynamic disturbance minus final infarct), and all contralateral mirror regions. RESULTS: Compared with mirror regions, the MTT in abnormal areas was always prolonged. The respective mean+/-SD CBF and CBV values were as follows: for INF, 28+/-16 mL/min per 100 g and 6.9+/-2.7%; for IGR, 36+/-20 mL/min per 100 g and 8.9+/-3.1%; for OLI, 50+/-17 mL/min per 100 g and 11.2+/-3%; and for mirror regions, 64+/-23 mL/min per 100 g and 8.7+/-2.5%. The CBV and CBF values were significantly different between all abnormal areas (except for the CBF between INF and IGR). In the area of DW/PW mismatch, a combined CBF or CBV threshold of 35 or 8.2, respectively, predicted evolution to infarction with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 76%. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative measurements of CBF and CBV in hyperacute stroke may help to predict infarct growth and to select the subjects who will benefit from thrombolysis.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The identification of the tissue at risk for infarction remains challenging in strokepatients. In this study, we evaluated the value of quantitative cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cerebral blood volume (CBV) measurements in the prediction of infarct growth in hyperacute stroke. METHODS: Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR), diffusion-weighted (DW), and gradient-echo echo-planar perfusion-weighted (PW) sequences were obtained in 66 patients within 6 hours of stroke onset; ischemia was confirmed on follow-up FLAIR images. We delineated the following: (1) the initial infarct on DW images, (2) the area of hemodynamic disturbance on mean transit time (MTT) maps, and (3) the final infarct on follow-up FLAIR images. MTT, CBF, and CBV were calculated in the following areas: area of initial infarct (INF), area of infarct growth (IGR, final minus initial infarct), the hemodynamically disturbed area that remained viable (OLI, hemodynamic disturbance minus final infarct), and all contralateral mirror regions. RESULTS: Compared with mirror regions, the MTT in abnormal areas was always prolonged. The respective mean+/-SD CBF and CBV values were as follows: for INF, 28+/-16 mL/min per 100 g and 6.9+/-2.7%; for IGR, 36+/-20 mL/min per 100 g and 8.9+/-3.1%; for OLI, 50+/-17 mL/min per 100 g and 11.2+/-3%; and for mirror regions, 64+/-23 mL/min per 100 g and 8.7+/-2.5%. The CBV and CBF values were significantly different between all abnormal areas (except for the CBF between INF and IGR). In the area of DW/PW mismatch, a combined CBF or CBV threshold of 35 or 8.2, respectively, predicted evolution to infarction with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 76%. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative measurements of CBF and CBV in hyperacute stroke may help to predict infarct growth and to select the subjects who will benefit from thrombolysis.
Authors: Mathieu Dehaes; Henry H Cheng; Erin M Buckley; Pei-Yi Lin; Silvina Ferradal; Kathryn Williams; Rutvi Vyas; Katherine Hagan; Daniel Wigmore; Erica McDavitt; Janet S Soul; Maria Angela Franceschini; Jane W Newburger; P Ellen Grant Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Daniel Sanák; Vladimír Nosál'; David Horák; Andrea Bártková; Kamil Zelenák; Roman Herzig; Jirí Bucil; David Skoloudík; Stanislav Burval; Viera Cisariková; Ivanka Vlachová; Martin Köcher; Jana Zapletalová; Egon Kurca; Petr Kanovský Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2006-08-29 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Clinton D Morgan; Marcus Stephens; Scott L Zuckerman; Magarya S Waitara; Peter J Morone; Michael C Dewan; J Mocco Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: P D Schellinger; R N Bryan; L R Caplan; J A Detre; R R Edelman; C Jaigobin; C S Kidwell; J P Mohr; M Sloan; A G Sorensen; S Warach Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-07-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Chin A Yi; Dong Gyu Na; Jae Wook Ryoo; Chan Hong Moon; Hong Sik Byun; Hong Gee Roh; Won-Jin Moon; Kwang Ho Lee; Soo Joo Lee Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2002 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 3.500