BACKGROUND: Rapid and easy clinical assessments for volumes of infarction and perfusion mismatch are needed. We tested whether simple geometric models generated accurate estimates of these volumes. METHODS: Acute diffusion-weighted image (DWI) and perfusion (mean transit time [MTT]) in 63 strokes and established infarct volumes in 50 subacute strokes were measured by computerized planimetry. Mismatch was defined as MTT/DWI > or = 1.2. Observers, blinded to planimetric values, measured lesions in three perpendicular axes A, B, and C. Geometric estimates of sphere, ellipsoid, bicone, and cylinder were compared to planimetric volume by least-squares linear regression. RESULTS: The ABC/2 formula (ellipsoid) was superior to other geometries for estimating volume of DWI (slope 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.38; R(2) = 0.91, p = 0.001) and MTT (slope 1.11, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.23; R(2) = 0.89, p = 0.001). The intrarater and interrater reliability for ABC/2 was high for both DWI (0.992 and 0.965) and MTT (0.881 and 0.712). For subacute infarct, the ABC/2 formula also best estimated planimetric volume (slope 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.19; R(2) = 0.74, p = 0.001). In general, sphere and cylinder geometries overestimated all volumes and bicone underestimated all volumes. The positive predictive value for mismatch was 92% and negative predictive value was 33%. CONCLUSIONS: Of the models tested, ABC/2 is reproducible, is accurate, and provides the best simple geometric estimate of infarction and mean transit time volumes. ABC/2 has a high positive predictive value for identifying mismatch greater than 20% and might be a useful tool for rapid determination of acute stroke treatment.
BACKGROUND: Rapid and easy clinical assessments for volumes of infarction and perfusion mismatch are needed. We tested whether simple geometric models generated accurate estimates of these volumes. METHODS: Acute diffusion-weighted image (DWI) and perfusion (mean transit time [MTT]) in 63 strokes and established infarct volumes in 50 subacute strokes were measured by computerized planimetry. Mismatch was defined as MTT/DWI > or = 1.2. Observers, blinded to planimetric values, measured lesions in three perpendicular axes A, B, and C. Geometric estimates of sphere, ellipsoid, bicone, and cylinder were compared to planimetric volume by least-squares linear regression. RESULTS: The ABC/2 formula (ellipsoid) was superior to other geometries for estimating volume of DWI (slope 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.38; R(2) = 0.91, p = 0.001) and MTT (slope 1.11, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.23; R(2) = 0.89, p = 0.001). The intrarater and interrater reliability for ABC/2 was high for both DWI (0.992 and 0.965) and MTT (0.881 and 0.712). For subacute infarct, the ABC/2 formula also best estimated planimetric volume (slope 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.19; R(2) = 0.74, p = 0.001). In general, sphere and cylinder geometries overestimated all volumes and bicone underestimated all volumes. The positive predictive value for mismatch was 92% and negative predictive value was 33%. CONCLUSIONS: Of the models tested, ABC/2 is reproducible, is accurate, and provides the best simple geometric estimate of infarction and mean transit time volumes. ABC/2 has a high positive predictive value for identifying mismatch greater than 20% and might be a useful tool for rapid determination of acute stroke treatment.
Authors: Daniel Sanák; Vladimír Nosál'; David Horák; Andrea Bártková; Kamil Zelenák; Roman Herzig; Jirí Bucil; David Skoloudík; Stanislav Burval; Viera Cisariková; Ivanka Vlachová; Martin Köcher; Jana Zapletalová; Egon Kurca; Petr Kanovský Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2006-08-29 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Hagen B Huttner; Thorsten Steiner; Marius Hartmann; Martin Köhrmann; Eric Juettler; Stephan Mueller; Johannes Wikner; Uta Meyding-Lamade; Peter Schramm; Stefan Schwab; Peter D Schellinger Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: S C Patel; S R Levine; B C Tilley; J C Grotta; M Lu; M Frankel; E C Haley; T G Brott; J P Broderick; S Horowitz; P D Lyden; C A Lewandowski; J R Marler; K M Welch Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-12 Impact factor: 56.272
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: Stephen M Davis; Geoffrey A Donnan; Mark W Parsons; Christopher Levi; Kenneth S Butcher; Andre Peeters; P Alan Barber; Christopher Bladin; Deidre A De Silva; Graham Byrnes; Jonathan B Chalk; John N Fink; Thomas E Kimber; David Schultz; Peter J Hand; Judith Frayne; Graeme Hankey; Keith Muir; Richard Gerraty; Brian M Tress; Patricia M Desmond Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2008-02-28 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Philipp Gruber; Martin Hlavica; Jatta Berberat; Benjamin Victor Ineichen; Michael Diepers; Krassen Nedeltchev; Timo Kahles; Luca Remonda Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2018-11-04 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Brian P Walcott; Jennifer C Miller; Churl-Su Kwon; Sameer A Sheth; Marc Hiller; Carolyn A Cronin; Lee H Schwamm; J Marc Simard; Kristopher T Kahle; W Taylor Kimberly; Kevin N Sheth Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.210