BACKGROUND: Posterior fossa strokes, particularly those related to basilar occlusion, pose a high risk for progression and poor neurological outcomes. The clinical history and examination are often not adequately sensitive or specific for detection. STUDY OBJECTIVES: Because this population stands to benefit from acute interventions such as intravenous and intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator, mechanical thrombectomy, and intensive monitoring for neurologic deterioration, this study examined the sensitivity of non-contrast head computed tomography (NCCT) for diagnosing posterior fossa strokes in the emergency department. METHODS: This study analyzed a prospectively collected database of acute ischemic stroke patients who underwent head NCCT within 30 h of symptom onset and who were subsequently found to have a posterior fossa infarct on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed within 6 h of the NCCT. RESULTS: There were 67 patients identified who had restricted diffusion on MRI in the posterior fossa. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores ranged from 0 to 36, median 3. Only 28 patients had evidence of infarction on the initial NCCT scan. The timing of NCCT scans ranged from 1.2 to 28.9 h after symptom onset. The sensitivity of NCCT was 41.8% (95% confidence interval 30.1-54.4). The longest period of time between symptom onset and a negative NCCT with a subsequent positive diffusion-weighted imaging MRI was 26.7 h. CONCLUSIONS: Head NCCT imaging is frequently insensitive for detecting posterior fossa infarction. Temporal evolution of strokes in this distribution, coupled with beam-hardening artifact, may contribute to this limitation. When a posterior fossa stroke is suspected and the NCCT is non-diagnostic, MRI is the preferred imaging modality to exclude posterior fossa infarction.
BACKGROUND: Posterior fossa strokes, particularly those related to basilar occlusion, pose a high risk for progression and poor neurological outcomes. The clinical history and examination are often not adequately sensitive or specific for detection. STUDY OBJECTIVES: Because this population stands to benefit from acute interventions such as intravenous and intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator, mechanical thrombectomy, and intensive monitoring for neurologic deterioration, this study examined the sensitivity of non-contrast head computed tomography (NCCT) for diagnosing posterior fossa strokes in the emergency department. METHODS: This study analyzed a prospectively collected database of acute ischemic strokepatients who underwent head NCCT within 30 h of symptom onset and who were subsequently found to have a posterior fossa infarct on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed within 6 h of the NCCT. RESULTS: There were 67 patients identified who had restricted diffusion on MRI in the posterior fossa. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores ranged from 0 to 36, median 3. Only 28 patients had evidence of infarction on the initial NCCT scan. The timing of NCCT scans ranged from 1.2 to 28.9 h after symptom onset. The sensitivity of NCCT was 41.8% (95% confidence interval 30.1-54.4). The longest period of time between symptom onset and a negative NCCT with a subsequent positive diffusion-weighted imaging MRI was 26.7 h. CONCLUSIONS: Head NCCT imaging is frequently insensitive for detecting posterior fossa infarction. Temporal evolution of strokes in this distribution, coupled with beam-hardening artifact, may contribute to this limitation. When a posterior fossa stroke is suspected and the NCCT is non-diagnostic, MRI is the preferred imaging modality to exclude posterior fossa infarction.
Authors: C Oppenheim; R Stanescu; D Dormont; S Crozier; B Marro; Y Samson; G Rancurel; C Marsault Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Pamela W Schaefer; Albert J Yoo; Donnie Bell; Elizabeth R Barak; Javier M Romero; Raul G Nogueira; Michael H Lev; Lee H Schwamm; Ramon G Gonzalez; Joshua A Hirsch Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-08-14 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Volker Puetz; P N Sylaja; Shelagh B Coutts; Michael D Hill; Imanuel Dzialowski; Pia Mueller; Ulf Becker; Gabriele Urban; Christine O'Reilly; Philip A Barber; Pranshu Sharma; Mayank Goyal; Georg Gahn; Ruediger von Kummer; Andrew M Demchuk Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-07-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Stefan T Engelter; Stephan G Wetzel; Leo H Bonati; Felix Fluri; Philippe A Lyrer Journal: Swiss Med Wkly Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 2.193
Authors: Adam Kobayashi; Joanna M Wardlaw; Richard I Lindley; Steff C Lewis; Peter A G Sandercock; Anna Czlonkowska Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-01-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Erica C S Camargo; Karen L Furie; Aneesh B Singhal; Luca Roccatagliata; Mary E Cunnane; Elkan F Halpern; Gordon J Harris; Wade S Smith; Ramon G Gonzalez; Walter J Koroshetz; Michael H Lev Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06-20 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lennie Lynn Chua de Castillo; Jose Danilo Bengzon Diestro; Katrina Hannah Dizon Ignacio; Paul Matthew Dimaguila Pasco Journal: BMJ Case Rep Date: 2019-03-31
Authors: Ali S Saber Tehrani; Jorge C Kattah; Kevin A Kerber; Daniel R Gold; David S Zee; Victor C Urrutia; David E Newman-Toker Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Kailash Krishnan; Kerolos Bassilious; Erik Eriksen; Philip M Bath; Nikola Sprigg; Sigrun Kierulf Brækken; Hege Ihle-Hansen; Morten Andreas Horn; Else Charlotte Sandset Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2019-04-10
Authors: David C Lauzier; Maria M Galardi; Kristin P Guilliams; Manu S Goyal; Catherine Amlie-Lefond; Danial K Hallam; Akash P Kansagra Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 7.914