BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The regional leptomeningeal score is a strong and reliable imaging predictor of good clinical outcomes in acute anterior circulation ischemic strokes and can therefore be used for imaging based patient selection. Efforts to determine biological determinants of collateral status are needed if techniques to alter collateral behavior and extend time windows are to succeed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective Institutional Review Board-approved study of patients with acute ischemic stroke and M1 middle cerebral artery+/- intracranial internal carotid artery occlusion at our center from 2003 to 2009. The rLMC score is based on scoring pial and lenticulostriate arteries (0, no; 1, less; 2, equal or more prominent compared with matching region in opposite hemisphere) in 6 ASPECTS regions (M1-6) plus anterior cerebral artery region and basal ganglia. Pial arteries in the Sylvian sulcus are scored 0, 2, or 4. Good clinical outcome was defined as mRS ≤ 2 at 90 days. RESULTS: The analysis included 138 patients: 37.6% had a good (17-20), 40.5% a medium (11-16), and 21.7% a poor (0-10) rLMC score. Interrater reliability was high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77%-0.95%). On univariate analysis, no single vascular risk factor was associated with the presence of poor rLMCs (P ≥ .20 for all comparisons). In multivariable analysis, the rLMC score (good versus poor: OR, 16.7; 95% CI, 2.9%-97.4%; medium versus poor: OR, 9.2, 95% CI, 1.7%-50.6%), age (< 80 years), baseline ASPECTS (≥ 8), and clot burden score (≥ 8) were independent predictors of good clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The rLMC score is a strong imaging parameter on CT angiography for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic strokes.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The regional leptomeningeal score is a strong and reliable imaging predictor of good clinical outcomes in acute anterior circulation ischemic strokes and can therefore be used for imaging based patient selection. Efforts to determine biological determinants of collateral status are needed if techniques to alter collateral behavior and extend time windows are to succeed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective Institutional Review Board-approved study of patients with acute ischemic stroke and M1 middle cerebral artery+/- intracranial internal carotid artery occlusion at our center from 2003 to 2009. The rLMC score is based on scoring pial and lenticulostriate arteries (0, no; 1, less; 2, equal or more prominent compared with matching region in opposite hemisphere) in 6 ASPECTS regions (M1-6) plus anterior cerebral artery region and basal ganglia. Pial arteries in the Sylvian sulcus are scored 0, 2, or 4. Good clinical outcome was defined as mRS ≤ 2 at 90 days. RESULTS: The analysis included 138 patients: 37.6% had a good (17-20), 40.5% a medium (11-16), and 21.7% a poor (0-10) rLMC score. Interrater reliability was high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77%-0.95%). On univariate analysis, no single vascular risk factor was associated with the presence of poor rLMCs (P ≥ .20 for all comparisons). In multivariable analysis, the rLMC score (good versus poor: OR, 16.7; 95% CI, 2.9%-97.4%; medium versus poor: OR, 9.2, 95% CI, 1.7%-50.6%), age (< 80 years), baseline ASPECTS (≥ 8), and clot burden score (≥ 8) were independent predictors of good clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The rLMC score is a strong imaging parameter on CT angiography for predicting clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic strokes.
Authors: Randall Higashida; Anthony Furlan; Heidi Roberts; Thomas Tomsick; Buddy Connors; John Barr; William Dillon; Steven Warach; Joseph Broderick; Barbara Tilley; David Sacks Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 3.464
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: Matthew B Maas; Michael H Lev; Hakan Ay; Aneesh B Singhal; David M Greer; Wade S Smith; Gordon J Harris; Elkan Halpern; André Kemmling; Walter J Koroshetz; Karen L Furie Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-07-09 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Michael D Hill; Howard A Rowley; Felix Adler; Michael Eliasziw; Anthony Furlan; Randall T Higashida; Lawrence R Wechsler; Heidi C Roberts; William P Dillon; Nancy J Fischbein; Carolyn M Firszt; Gregory A Schulz; Alastair M Buchan Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-07-03 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Søren Christensen; Brian M Tress; Leonid Churilov; Patricia M Desmond; Mark W Parsons; P Alan Barber; Christopher R Levi; Christopher Bladin; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: S E Beyer; K M Thierfelder; L von Baumgarten; M Rottenkolber; F G Meinel; H Janssen; B Ertl-Wagner; M F Reiser; W H Sommer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jennifer L Lucitti; Jessica K Mackey; Jeffrey C Morrison; Jody J Haigh; Ralf H Adams; James E Faber Journal: Circ Res Date: 2012-09-10 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: E M Fanou; J Knight; R I Aviv; S-P Hojjat; S P Symons; L Zhang; M Wintermark Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Bijoy K Menon; Eric E Smith; Shelagh B Coutts; Donald G Welsh; James E Faber; Mayank Goyal; Michael D Hill; Andrew M Demchuk; Zaheed Damani; Kyung-Hee Cho; Hyuk-Won Chang; Jeong-Ho Hong; Sung Il Sohn Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 10.422