M Luby1, S Warach. 1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. lubym@ninds.nih.gov
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated 2 methods of measuring MR imaging perfusion-diffusion mismatch to determine whether reliability is improved by direct measurement on a single, blended map. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Image software was used for measurement of lesion volumes from diffusion-weighted images (DWI) and mean transit time (MTT) calculated from perfusion-weighted (PWI) images on 64 patients with acute stroke. For the first method, the DWI and MTT lesions were measured separately. For the second method, the mismatch volume was measured directly on the blended images created from the registered DWI and MTT images. RESULTS: Test-retest agreement was 100% and 97% for the separate and blended methods using mismatch cutoffs of 20% or more versus less than 20%. There were no significant differences in the mismatch statistics between the methods. CONCLUSIONS: Mismatch volumes by a single reader can provide highly reliable and consistent results even when separately measuring DWI and MTT lesions. Propagation of measurement error was not demonstrated, and the methods were statistically comparable.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated 2 methods of measuring MR imaging perfusion-diffusion mismatch to determine whether reliability is improved by direct measurement on a single, blended map. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Image software was used for measurement of lesion volumes from diffusion-weighted images (DWI) and mean transit time (MTT) calculated from perfusion-weighted (PWI) images on 64 patients with acute stroke. For the first method, the DWI and MTT lesions were measured separately. For the second method, the mismatch volume was measured directly on the blended images created from the registered DWI and MTT images. RESULTS: Test-retest agreement was 100% and 97% for the separate and blended methods using mismatch cutoffs of 20% or more versus less than 20%. There were no significant differences in the mismatch statistics between the methods. CONCLUSIONS: Mismatch volumes by a single reader can provide highly reliable and consistent results even when separately measuring DWI and MTT lesions. Propagation of measurement error was not demonstrated, and the methods were statistically comparable.
Authors: K S Butcher; M Parsons; L MacGregor; P A Barber; J Chalk; C Bladin; C Levi; T Kimber; D Schultz; J Fink; B Tress; G Donnan; S Davis Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Anthony J Furlan; Dirk Eyding; Gregory W Albers; Yasir Al-Rawi; Kennedy R Lees; Howard A Rowley; Christian Sachara; Mariola Soehngen; Steven Warach; Werner Hacke Journal: Stroke Date: 2006-03-30 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Werner Hacke; Greg Albers; Yasir Al-Rawi; Julien Bogousslavsky; Antonio Davalos; Michael Eliasziw; Michael Fischer; Anthony Furlan; Markku Kaste; Kennedy R Lees; Mariola Soehngen; Steven Warach Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Julio A Chalela; Dong-Wha Kang; Marie Luby; Mustapha Ezzeddine; Lawrence L Latour; Jason W Todd; Billy Dunn; Steven Warach Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Shelagh B Coutts; Jessica E Simon; Anna I Tomanek; Philip A Barber; Jean Chan; Mark E Hudon; J Ross Mitchell; Richard Frayne; Michael Eliasziw; Alastair M Buchan; Andrew M Demchuk Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-06-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Marie Luby; Katherine D Ku; Lawrence L Latour; José G Merino; Amie W Hsia; John K Lynch; Steven Warach Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-02-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: A D Furtado; B C Lau; E Vittinghoff; W P Dillon; W S Smith; T Rigby; L Boussel; M Wintermark Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-11-26 Impact factor: 3.825