BACKGROUND: The one third middle cerebral artery territory ((1/3) MCA) method and the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) were used to detect significant early ischemic changes (EIC) on CT brain of acute stroke patients. We sought to compare the reliability of the 2 methods in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Eighty consecutive patients admitted to a community hospital in Hong Kong with suspected acute ischemic stroke and a CT brain scan performed within 6 hours of symptom onset were included. Five blinded observers (1 neurologist, 2 general radiologists, and 2 neuroradiologists) independently evaluated the scans, using the ATLANTIS/CT Summit criteria for >(1/3) MCA involvement, and ASPECTS <or=7. Kappa statistics were used to determine interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Significant EIC were present in 11.4% of the scans with the (1/3) MCA method, and 19.4% with ASPECTS. For >(1/3) MCA involvement, all observers agreed in 57 cases (71%), with moderate interobserver agreement (kappa=0.49). For ASPECTS <or=7, all observers agreed in 34 cases (42%), with fair interobserver agreement (kappa=0.34). After prevalence and bias adjustments, substantial (prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa [PABAK]=0.74) and moderate (PABAK=0.44) agreements were found for the (1/3) MCA method and ASPECTS respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The (1/3) MCA method was more reliable in detecting significant EIC on CT brain within 6 hours of stroke onset in routine clinical practice, whereas ASPECTS was able to detect significant EIC in a higher proportion of these early scans.
BACKGROUND: The one third middle cerebral artery territory ((1/3) MCA) method and the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) were used to detect significant early ischemic changes (EIC) on CT brain of acute strokepatients. We sought to compare the reliability of the 2 methods in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Eighty consecutive patients admitted to a community hospital in Hong Kong with suspected acute ischemic stroke and a CT brain scan performed within 6 hours of symptom onset were included. Five blinded observers (1 neurologist, 2 general radiologists, and 2 neuroradiologists) independently evaluated the scans, using the ATLANTIS/CT Summit criteria for >(1/3) MCA involvement, and ASPECTS <or=7. Kappa statistics were used to determine interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Significant EIC were present in 11.4% of the scans with the (1/3) MCA method, and 19.4% with ASPECTS. For >(1/3) MCA involvement, all observers agreed in 57 cases (71%), with moderate interobserver agreement (kappa=0.49). For ASPECTS <or=7, all observers agreed in 34 cases (42%), with fair interobserver agreement (kappa=0.34). After prevalence and bias adjustments, substantial (prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa [PABAK]=0.74) and moderate (PABAK=0.44) agreements were found for the (1/3) MCA method and ASPECTS respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The (1/3) MCA method was more reliable in detecting significant EIC on CT brain within 6 hours of stroke onset in routine clinical practice, whereas ASPECTS was able to detect significant EIC in a higher proportion of these early scans.
Authors: J H Warwick Pexman; Michael D Hill; Alastair M Buchan; Andrew M Demchuk; Philip A Barber; Jessica E Simon; Shelagh B Coutts Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Linda Berg; Oivind Gjertsen; Christian Hellum; Gesche Neckelmann; Lars G Johnsen; Geir E Eide; Ansgar Espeland Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: James E Siegler; Steven R Messé; Heidi Sucharew; Scott E Kasner; Tapan Mehta; Niraj Arora; Amy K Starosciak; Felipe De Los Rios La Rosa; Natasha R Barnhill; Akshitkumar M Mistry; Kishan Patel; Salman Assad; Amjad Tarboosh; Katarina Dakay; Jeff Wagner; Alicia Bennett; Bharathi Jagadeesan; Christopher Streib; Stewart A Weber; Rohan Chitale; John J Volpi; Stephan A Mayer; Shadi Yaghi; Mahesh V Jayaraman; Pooja Khatri; Eva A Mistry Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2019-11-24 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: V K Sundaram; J Goldstein; D Wheelwright; A Aggarwal; P S Pawha; A Doshi; J T Fifi; R De Leacy; J Mocco; J Puig; K Nael Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: P A Barber; M D Hill; M Eliasziw; A M Demchuk; J H W Pexman; M E Hudon; A Tomanek; R Frayne; A M Buchan Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: A C Gupta; P W Schaefer; Z A Chaudhry; T M Leslie-Mazwi; R V Chandra; R G González; J A Hirsch; A J Yoo Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-02-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Tom van Seeters; Geert Jan Biessels; Joris M Niesten; Irene C van der Schaaf; Jan Willem Dankbaar; Alexander D Horsch; Willem P T M Mali; L Jaap Kappelle; Yolanda van der Graaf; Birgitta K Velthuis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 3.240