BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Various calculation methods are available to estimate the transit-time on MR perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI). Each method may affect the results of PWI. Steno-occlusive disease in the parent vessels is another factor that may affect the results of the PWI. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the effect of the calculation methods and underlying vasculopathy on PWI. METHODS: From a pool of 113 patients who had undergone PWI during the study period, a total of 12 patients with nonlacunar ischemic strokes who were scanned within 24 hours after onset of symptom were selected for the study. The patient population consisted of 6 patients who had extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis (>70%) and 6 individuals without stenosis. Seven different postprocessing methods were evaluated: first moment, ratio of area to peak, time to peak (TTP), relative TTP, arrival time, full-width at half-maximum, and deconvolution methods. Follow-up MR or CT images were used to determine the areas that evolved into infarcts, which served as the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity of each transit time technique were calculated. RESULTS: Calculation methods with high sensitivity were the first moment (sensitivity, 74%), TTP (sensitivity, 77%), and deconvolution methods (sensitivity, 81% to 94%). Between the 2 groups with and without internal carotid artery stenosis, the specificity of most of the techniques was lower in the internal carotid artery stenosis group. The first moment and deconvolution methods maintained relatively high specificity even in the stenosis group. CONCLUSIONS: The calculation technique and presence of underlying vasculopathy have a direct impact on the results of PWI. The methods with high sensitivity even in the presence of steno-occlusive disease were the first moment and deconvolution methods with arterial input function derived from the peri-infarct arteries; the deconvolution method was the superior choice because of higher lesion conspicuity.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Various calculation methods are available to estimate the transit-time on MR perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI). Each method may affect the results of PWI. Steno-occlusive disease in the parent vessels is another factor that may affect the results of the PWI. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the effect of the calculation methods and underlying vasculopathy on PWI. METHODS: From a pool of 113 patients who had undergone PWI during the study period, a total of 12 patients with nonlacunar ischemic strokes who were scanned within 24 hours after onset of symptom were selected for the study. The patient population consisted of 6 patients who had extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis (>70%) and 6 individuals without stenosis. Seven different postprocessing methods were evaluated: first moment, ratio of area to peak, time to peak (TTP), relative TTP, arrival time, full-width at half-maximum, and deconvolution methods. Follow-up MR or CT images were used to determine the areas that evolved into infarcts, which served as the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity of each transit time technique were calculated. RESULTS: Calculation methods with high sensitivity were the first moment (sensitivity, 74%), TTP (sensitivity, 77%), and deconvolution methods (sensitivity, 81% to 94%). Between the 2 groups with and without internal carotid artery stenosis, the specificity of most of the techniques was lower in the internal carotid artery stenosis group. The first moment and deconvolution methods maintained relatively high specificity even in the stenosis group. CONCLUSIONS: The calculation technique and presence of underlying vasculopathy have a direct impact on the results of PWI. The methods with high sensitivity even in the presence of steno-occlusive disease were the first moment and deconvolution methods with arterial input function derived from the peri-infarct arteries; the deconvolution method was the superior choice because of higher lesion conspicuity.
Authors: Carlos Leiva-Salinas; James M Provenzale; Kohsuke Kudo; Makoto Sasaki; Max Wintermark Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-04-10 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: D M Mezzapesa; M Petruzzellis; V Lucivero; M Prontera; A Tinelli; M Sancilio; A Carella; F Federico Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 2.804