Max Wintermark1, Benison C Lau, Jeffrey Chien, Sandeep Arora. 1. Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Section, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, Box 0628, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628, USA. Max.Wintermark@radiology.ucsf.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Dynamic perfusion-CT (PCT) with deconvolution requires an arterial input function (AIF) for postprocessing. In clinical settings, the anterior cerebral artery (ACA) is often chosen for simplicity. The goals of this study were to determine how the AIF selection influences PCT results in acute stroke patients and whether the ACA is an appropriate default AIF. METHODS: We retrospectively identified consecutive patients suspected of hemispheric stroke of less than 48 h duration who were evaluated on admission by PCT. PCT datasets were postprocessed using multiple AIF, and cerebral blood volume (CBV) and flow (CBF), and mean transit time (MTT) values were measured in the corresponding territories. Results from corresponding territories in the same patients were compared using paired t-tests. The volumes of infarct core and tissue at risk obtained with different AIFs were compared to the final infarct volume. RESULTS: Of 113 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 55 with stroke were considered for analysis. The MTT values obtained with an "ischemic" AIF tended to be shorter (P=0.055) and the CBF values higher (P=0.108) than those obtained using a "nonischemic" AIF. CBV values were not influenced by the selection of the AIF. No statistically significant difference was observed between the size of the PCT infarct core (P=0.121) and tissue at risk (P=0.178), regardless of AIF selection. CONCLUSION: In acute stroke patients, the selection of the AIF has no statistically significant impact of the PCT results; standardization of the PCT postprocessing using the ACA as the default AIF is adequate.
INTRODUCTION: Dynamic perfusion-CT (PCT) with deconvolution requires an arterial input function (AIF) for postprocessing. In clinical settings, the anterior cerebral artery (ACA) is often chosen for simplicity. The goals of this study were to determine how the AIF selection influences PCT results in acute strokepatients and whether the ACA is an appropriate default AIF. METHODS: We retrospectively identified consecutive patients suspected of hemispheric stroke of less than 48 h duration who were evaluated on admission by PCT. PCT datasets were postprocessed using multiple AIF, and cerebral blood volume (CBV) and flow (CBF), and mean transit time (MTT) values were measured in the corresponding territories. Results from corresponding territories in the same patients were compared using paired t-tests. The volumes of infarct core and tissue at risk obtained with different AIFs were compared to the final infarct volume. RESULTS: Of 113 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 55 with stroke were considered for analysis. The MTT values obtained with an "ischemic" AIF tended to be shorter (P=0.055) and the CBF values higher (P=0.108) than those obtained using a "nonischemic" AIF. CBV values were not influenced by the selection of the AIF. No statistically significant difference was observed between the size of the PCT infarct core (P=0.121) and tissue at risk (P=0.178), regardless of AIF selection. CONCLUSION: In acute strokepatients, the selection of the AIF has no statistically significant impact of the PCT results; standardization of the PCT postprocessing using the ACA as the default AIF is adequate.
Authors: Cory Lorenz; Thomas Benner; Chloe Joan Lopez; Hakan Ay; Ming Wang Zhu; Hannu Aronen; Jari Karonen; Yawu Liu; Juho Nuutinen; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jessica C Tan; William P Dillon; Songling Liu; Felix Adler; Wade S Smith; Max Wintermark Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Peter D Schellinger; Lawrence L Latour; Chen-Sen Wu; Julio A Chalela; Steven Warach Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2005-11-29 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Edward D Greenberg; Y Pierre Gobin; Howard Riina; Carl E Johnson; Apostolos J Tsiouris; Joseph Comunale; Pina C Sanelli Journal: Imaging Med Date: 2011-06-01
Authors: A E Othman; S Afat; C Brockmann; O Nikoubashman; G Bier; M A Brockmann; K Nikolaou; J H Tai; Z P Yang; J H Kim; M Wiesmann Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Amita Kamath; Wade S Smith; William J Powers; Alessandro Cianfoni; Jeffrey D Chien; Tom Videen; Michael T Lawton; Bruce Finley; William P Dillon; Max Wintermark Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2008-05-29 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: H Baradaran; V Fodera; D Mir; K Kesavabhotla; K Kesavobhotla; J Ivanidze; U Ozbek; A Gupta; J Claassen; P C Sanelli Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ronan P Killeen; Alvin I Mushlin; Carl E Johnson; Joseph P Comunale; Apostolos John Tsiouris; Holly Delaney; Allison Dunning; Pina C Sanelli Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2011-06-11 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: P C Sanelli; A Pandya; A Z Segal; A Gupta; S Hurtado-Rua; J Ivanidze; K Kesavabhotla; D Mir; A I Mushlin; M G M Hunink Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-05-08 Impact factor: 3.825