Literature DB >> 22858726

Comparison of computed tomography perfusion and magnetic resonance imaging perfusion-diffusion mismatch in ischemic stroke.

Bruce C V Campbell1, Søren Christensen, Christopher R Levi, Patricia M Desmond, Geoffrey A Donnan, Stephen M Davis, Mark W Parsons.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Perfusion imaging has the potential to select patients most likely to respond to thrombolysis. We tested the correspondence of computed tomography perfusion (CTP)-derived mismatch with contemporaneous perfusion-diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
METHODS: Acute ischemic stroke patients 3 to 6 hours after onset had CTP and perfusion-diffusion MRI within 1 hour, before thrombolysis. Relative cerebral blood flow (relCBF) and time to peak of the deconvolved tissue residue function (Tmax) were calculated. The diffusion lesion (diffusion-weighted imaging) was registered to the CTP slabs and manually outlined to its maximal visual extent. Volumetric accuracy of CT-relCBF infarct core (compared with diffusion-weighted imaging) was tested. To reduce false-positive low CBF regions, relCBF core was restricted to voxels within a relative time-to-peak (relTTP) >4 seconds for lesion region of interest. The MR-Tmax >6 seconds perfusion lesion was automatically segmented and registered to CTP. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis determined the optimal CT-Tmax threshold to match MR-Tmax >6 seconds. Agreement of these CT parameters with MR perfusion-diffusion mismatch in coregistered slabs was assessed (mismatch ratio >1.2, absolute mismatch >10 mL, infarct core <70 mL).
RESULTS: In analysis of 49 patients (mean onset to CT, 213 minutes; mean CT to MR, 31 minutes), constraining relCBF <31% within the automated relTTP perfusion lesion region of interest reduced the median magnitude of volumetric error (vs diffusion-weighted imaging) from 47.5 mL to 15.8 mL (P<0.001). The optimal CT-Tmax threshold to match MR-Tmax >6 seconds was 6.2 seconds (95% confidence interval, 5.6-7.3 seconds; sensitivity, 91%; specificity, 70%; area under the curve, 0.87). Using CT-Tmax >6 seconds "penumbra" and relTTP-constrained relCBF "core," CT-based and MRI-based mismatch status was concordant in 90% (kappa=0.80).
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative CTP mismatch classification using relCBF and Tmax is similar to perfusion-diffusion MRI. The greater accessibility of CTP may facilitate generalizability of mismatch-based selection in clinical practice and trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22858726     DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.660548

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  53 in total

1.  Optimization of the method for assessment of brain perfusion in humans using contrast-enhanced reflectometry: multidistance time-resolved measurements.

Authors:  Daniel Milej; Dariusz Janusek; Anna Gerega; Stanislaw Wojtkiewicz; Piotr Sawosz; Joanna Treszczanowicz; Wojciech Weigl; Adam Liebert
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  A benchmarking tool to evaluate computer tomography perfusion infarct core predictions against a DWI standard.

Authors:  Carlo W Cereda; Søren Christensen; Bruce C V Campbell; Nishant K Mishra; Michael Mlynash; Christopher Levi; Matus Straka; Max Wintermark; Roland Bammer; Gregory W Albers; Mark W Parsons; Maarten G Lansberg
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 6.200

3.  Multimodal Computed Tomography Based Definition of Cerebral Imaging Profiles for Acute Stroke Reperfusion Therapy (CT-DEFINE): Results of a Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  K Barlinn; J Seibt; K Engellandt; J Gerber; V Puetz; J Kepplinger; O Wunderlich; L-P Pallesen; U Bodechtel; R Koch; R von Kummer; I Dzialowski
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-08-23       Impact factor: 3.649

4.  Contralateral Hemispheric Cerebral Blood Flow Measured With Arterial Spin Labeling Can Predict Outcome in Acute Stroke.

Authors:  Thoralf Thamm; Jia Guo; Jarrett Rosenberg; Tie Liang; Michael P Marks; Soren Christensen; Huy M Do; Stephanie M Kemp; Emma Adair; Irina Eyngorn; Michael Mlynash; Tudor G Jovin; Bart P Keogh; Hui J Chen; Maarten G Lansberg; Gregory W Albers; Greg Zaharchuk
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 5.  Imaging the physiological evolution of the ischemic penumbra in acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Richard Leigh; Linda Knutsson; Jinyuan Zhou; Peter Cm van Zijl
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 6.200

Review 6.  Imaging assessment of acute ischaemic stroke: a review of radiological methods.

Authors:  Aubrey George Smith; Chris Rowland Hill
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Color-coded digital subtraction angiography in the management of a rare case of middle cerebral artery pure arterial malformation. A technical and case report.

Authors:  Caleb E Feliciano; Eva Pamias-Portalatin; Jorge Mendoza-Torres; Euclides Effio; Yadira Moran; Rafael Rodriguez-Mercado
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 1.610

8.  The Effects of Acetazolamide on the Evaluation of Cerebral Hemodynamics and Functional Connectivity Using Blood Oxygen Level-Dependent MR Imaging in Patients with Chronic Steno-Occlusive Disease of the Anterior Circulation.

Authors:  J Wu; S Dehkharghani; F Nahab; J Allen; D Qiu
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Three-dimensional black-blood contrast-enhanced MRI improves detection of intraluminal thrombi in patients with acute ischaemic stroke.

Authors:  Won Jang; Hyo Sung Kwak; Gyung Ho Chung; Seung Bae Hwang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Successful recanalization with multimodality endovascular interventional therapy in acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Amorn Jongsathapongpan; Anuchit Raumthanthong; Sombat Muengtaweepongsa
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2014-03-16       Impact factor: 1.337

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.