BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Variation in the definition of lacunar lesions on imaging and difficulties in their detection may be hampering lacunar stroke research. We assessed literature definitions of imaging lacunar lesions and the definitions and detection of lacunar lesions among small-vessel disease researchers. METHODS: We assessed definitions of imaging lacunar lesion in 50 randomly selected articles from 3 stroke-related journals and an online survey of small-vessel disease researchers. In the literature review, we assessed clinical/imaging definitions of lacunar stroke. In the survey, we assessed lacunar lesion detection, effects of lesion appearance, background white matter lesions, and provision of relevant data. RESULTS: Among 50 articles, imaging definitions were varied and often limited; size was stated in 21 of 43 (49%) studies of acute and in 9 of 20 (45%) studies of old lesions and site in 18 (42%) and 4 (20%), respectively. Clinical definitions also varied, and images were read mostly by nonradiologists. Among 56 survey respondents, multiple descriptions were used for recent and old, symptomatic and asymptomatic, lesions on imaging. Most agreed on definitions for site (98%) and "old lacunar infarct" (61%) size. Cavitated (vs noncavitated) lesions were usually identified as lacunar lesions; with increasing white matter lesions, however, noncavitated lesions were very unlikely to be identified, even with prior imaging available (7.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging definitions of lacunar lesions vary widely, in part due to variation in lesion detection and classification. A consensus for imaging definitions of small-vessel disease features would be helpful.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Variation in the definition of lacunar lesions on imaging and difficulties in their detection may be hampering lacunar stroke research. We assessed literature definitions of imaging lacunar lesions and the definitions and detection of lacunar lesions among small-vessel disease researchers. METHODS: We assessed definitions of imaging lacunar lesion in 50 randomly selected articles from 3 stroke-related journals and an online survey of small-vessel disease researchers. In the literature review, we assessed clinical/imaging definitions of lacunar stroke. In the survey, we assessed lacunar lesion detection, effects of lesion appearance, background white matter lesions, and provision of relevant data. RESULTS: Among 50 articles, imaging definitions were varied and often limited; size was stated in 21 of 43 (49%) studies of acute and in 9 of 20 (45%) studies of old lesions and site in 18 (42%) and 4 (20%), respectively. Clinical definitions also varied, and images were read mostly by nonradiologists. Among 56 survey respondents, multiple descriptions were used for recent and old, symptomatic and asymptomatic, lesions on imaging. Most agreed on definitions for site (98%) and "old lacunar infarct" (61%) size. Cavitated (vs noncavitated) lesions were usually identified as lacunar lesions; with increasing white matter lesions, however, noncavitated lesions were very unlikely to be identified, even with prior imaging available (7.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging definitions of lacunar lesions vary widely, in part due to variation in lesion detection and classification. A consensus for imaging definitions of small-vessel disease features would be helpful.
Authors: T Das; F Settecase; M Boulos; T Huynh; C D d'Esterre; S P Symons; L Zhang; R I Aviv Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ralph Weber; Christian Weimar; Isabel Wanke; Claudia Möller-Hartmann; Elke R Gizewski; Jon Blatchford; Karin Hermansson; Andrew M Demchuk; Michael Forsting; Ralph L Sacco; Jeffrey L Saver; Steven Warach; Hans Christoph Diener; Anke Diehl Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: J C Benson; S Payabvash; S Mortazavi; L Zhang; P Salazar; B Hoffman; M Oswood; A M McKinney Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: François De Guio; Eric Jouvent; Geert Jan Biessels; Sandra E Black; Carol Brayne; Christopher Chen; Charlotte Cordonnier; Frank-Eric De Leeuw; Martin Dichgans; Fergus Doubal; Marco Duering; Carole Dufouil; Emrah Duzel; Franz Fazekas; Vladimir Hachinski; M Arfan Ikram; Jennifer Linn; Paul M Matthews; Bernard Mazoyer; Vincent Mok; Bo Norrving; John T O'Brien; Leonardo Pantoni; Stefan Ropele; Perminder Sachdev; Reinhold Schmidt; Sudha Seshadri; Eric E Smith; Luciano A Sposato; Blossom Stephan; Richard H Swartz; Christophe Tzourio; Mark van Buchem; Aad van der Lugt; Robert van Oostenbrugge; Meike W Vernooij; Anand Viswanathan; David Werring; Frank Wollenweber; Joanna M Wardlaw; Hugues Chabriat Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Mansour Al-Zghloul; Holger Wenz; Máté Maros; Johannes Böhme; Christoph Groden; Alex Förster Journal: In Vivo Date: 2018 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.155