BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A simple classification instrument based on imaging that predicts outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke is lacking. We tested the hypotheses that the Boston Acute Stroke Imaging Scale (BASIS) classification instrument effectively predicts patient outcomes and is superior to the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) in predicting outcomes in acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 230 prospectively screened, consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, 87 had noncontrast CT (NCCT)/CT angiography (CTA), and 118 had MR imaging/MR angiography (MRA) at admission and were classified as having major stroke by BASIS criteria if they had a proximal cerebral artery occlusion or, if no occlusion, imaging evidence of significant parenchymal ischemia; all of the others were classified as minor strokes. Outcomes included death, length of hospitalization, and discharge disposition. BASIS was compared with ASPECTS (dichotomized > or <or=7) in 87 patients who had NCCT/CTA. RESULTS: BASIS classification by NCCT/CTA was equivalent to MR imaging/MRA. Fifty-six of 205 patients were classified as having major strokes including all 6 of the deaths. A total of 71.4% and 15.4% of major and minor stroke survivors, respectively, were discharged to a rehabilitation facility, whereas 14.3% and 79.2% of patients with major and minor strokes were discharged to home. The mean length of hospitalization was 12.3 and 3.3 days for the major and minor stroke groups, respectively (all outcomes, P < .0001). In 87 NCCT/CTA patients, BASIS and ASPECTS agreed in 22 major and 44 minor strokes. BASIS classified 21 patients as having major strokes who were classified as having minor strokes by ASPECTS. The BASIS major/ASPECTS minor stroke group had outcomes similar to those classified as major strokes by both instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The BASIS classification instrument is effective and appears superior to ASPECTS in predicting outcomes in acute ischemic stroke.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A simple classification instrument based on imaging that predicts outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke is lacking. We tested the hypotheses that the Boston Acute Stroke Imaging Scale (BASIS) classification instrument effectively predicts patient outcomes and is superior to the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) in predicting outcomes in acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 230 prospectively screened, consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke, 87 had noncontrast CT (NCCT)/CT angiography (CTA), and 118 had MR imaging/MR angiography (MRA) at admission and were classified as having major stroke by BASIS criteria if they had a proximal cerebral artery occlusion or, if no occlusion, imaging evidence of significant parenchymal ischemia; all of the others were classified as minor strokes. Outcomes included death, length of hospitalization, and discharge disposition. BASIS was compared with ASPECTS (dichotomized > or <or=7) in 87 patients who had NCCT/CTA. RESULTS: BASIS classification by NCCT/CTA was equivalent to MR imaging/MRA. Fifty-six of 205 patients were classified as having major strokes including all 6 of the deaths. A total of 71.4% and 15.4% of major and minor stroke survivors, respectively, were discharged to a rehabilitation facility, whereas 14.3% and 79.2% of patients with major and minor strokes were discharged to home. The mean length of hospitalization was 12.3 and 3.3 days for the major and minor stroke groups, respectively (all outcomes, P < .0001). In 87 NCCT/CTA patients, BASIS and ASPECTS agreed in 22 major and 44 minor strokes. BASIS classified 21 patients as having major strokes who were classified as having minor strokes by ASPECTS. The BASIS major/ASPECTS minor stroke group had outcomes similar to those classified as major strokes by both instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The BASIS classification instrument is effective and appears superior to ASPECTS in predicting outcomes in acute ischemic stroke.
Authors: Darius G Nabavi; Stephan P Kloska; Eun-Mi Nam; Michael Freund; Christiane G Gaus; Ernst Klotz; Walter Heindel; E Bernd Ringelstein Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-12 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: K O Lövblad; A E Baird; G Schlaug; A Benfield; B Siewert; B Voetsch; A Connor; C Burzynski; R R Edelman; S Warach Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Shelagh B Coutts; Michael H Lev; Michael Eliasziw; Luca Roccatagliata; Michael D Hill; Lee H Schwamm; J H Warwick Pexman; Walter J Koroshetz; Mark E Hudon; Alastair M Buchan; R Gilberto Gonzalez; Andrew M Demchuk Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-10-14 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Carlos A Molina; Andrei V Alexandrov; Andrew M Demchuk; Maher Saqqur; Ken Uchino; José Alvarez-Sabín Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-12-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Wade S Smith; Jack W Tsao; Martha E Billings; S Claiborne Johnston; J Claude Hemphill; David C Bonovich; William P Dillon Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2006 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Leticia C S Souza; Seyedmehdi Payabvash; Yifei Wang; Shervin Kamalian; Pamela Schaefer; R Gilberto Gonzalez; Karen L Furie; Michael H Lev Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2011-11-30 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: S Payabvash; S Kamalian; S Fung; Y Wang; J Passanese; S Kamalian; L C S Souza; A Kemmling; G J Harris; E F Halpern; R G González; K L Furie; M H Lev Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-05-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Niko Sillanpaa; Jukka T Saarinen; Harri Rusanen; Jari Hakomaki; Arto Lahteela; Heikki Numminen; Irina Elovaara; Prasun Dastidar; Seppo Soimakallio Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2011-09-09 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Albert J Yoo; Javier Romero; Reza Hakimelahi; Raul G Nogueira; James D Rabinov; Johnny C Pryor; R Gilberto González; Joshua A Hirsch; Pamela W Schaefer Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2010-04-23 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Albert J Yoo; Luis A Verduzco; Pamela W Schaefer; Joshua A Hirsch; James D Rabinov; R Gilberto González Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: V M Timpone; M H Lev; S Kamalian; L T Morais; A M Franceschi; L Souza; P W Schaefer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-09-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Payabvash; L C S Souza; S Kamalian; Y Wang; J Passanese; S Kamalian; S H Fung; E F Halpern; P W Schaefer; R G Gonzalez; K L Furie; M H Lev Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-05-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Reza Hakimelahi; Albert J Yoo; Julian He; Lee H Schwamm; Michael H Lev; Pamela W Schaefer; Ramon Gilberto González Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 2.474