BACKGROUND: In 2003, Higashida et al proposed the Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction scale to evaluate angiographic intracranial flow. Our aim is to review how subsequently published studies define TICI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the ISI Web of Knowledge and SciVerse Scopus databases to search for "TICI" and "thrombolysis in cerebral infarction" and for articles that cited the original TICI paper from January 2004 through May 2012. Articles were categorized according to their definition of the TICI categories, typically grades 0-4, with grade 2 (partial reperfusion) subdivided into 2a and 2b, and rate of contrast entry to the perfused area. In addition, we catalogued the type of redefinitions of TICI subcategory 2 and additions of new categories. RESULTS: Of 236 articles screened, 74 were included. Eight (11%) explicitly followed the TICI scale as originally defined. Thirty-seven (50%) cited Higashida but did not define their scale. Fifteen (21%) used and explained modified scales. Thirteen (18%) used the term TICI, but did not define the scale and did not cite Higashida. Eighteen (24%) specified a 2a subcategory. Nine defined grade 2a as <67% filling, 6 defined it as <50%, and 3 did not offer a percentage. Two studies added a 2c subcategory. Fifty-two (70%) used a cutoff level to define "successful reperfusion." Of these, 65% used TICI ≥2, 33% used TICI ≥2b, and 2% used TICI = 3. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in the definition and/or application of the TICI scale in the literature. This variability could considerably impact our understanding of results of revascularization studies.
BACKGROUND: In 2003, Higashida et al proposed the Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction scale to evaluate angiographic intracranial flow. Our aim is to review how subsequently published studies define TICI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the ISI Web of Knowledge and SciVerse Scopus databases to search for "TICI" and "thrombolysis in cerebral infarction" and for articles that cited the original TICI paper from January 2004 through May 2012. Articles were categorized according to their definition of the TICI categories, typically grades 0-4, with grade 2 (partial reperfusion) subdivided into 2a and 2b, and rate of contrast entry to the perfused area. In addition, we catalogued the type of redefinitions of TICI subcategory 2 and additions of new categories. RESULTS: Of 236 articles screened, 74 were included. Eight (11%) explicitly followed the TICI scale as originally defined. Thirty-seven (50%) cited Higashida but did not define their scale. Fifteen (21%) used and explained modified scales. Thirteen (18%) used the term TICI, but did not define the scale and did not cite Higashida. Eighteen (24%) specified a 2a subcategory. Nine defined grade 2a as <67% filling, 6 defined it as <50%, and 3 did not offer a percentage. Two studies added a 2c subcategory. Fifty-two (70%) used a cutoff level to define "successful reperfusion." Of these, 65% used TICI ≥2, 33% used TICI ≥2b, and 2% used TICI = 3. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in the definition and/or application of the TICI scale in the literature. This variability could considerably impact our understanding of results of revascularization studies.
Authors: P Mordasini; N Frabetti; J Gralla; G Schroth; U Fischer; M Arnold; C Brekenfeld Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-10-21 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Z Kulcsár; C Bonvin; V M Pereira; S Altrichter; H Yilmaz; K O Lövblad; R Sztajzel; D A Rüfenacht Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: I Deguchi; T Dembo; T Fukuoka; H Nagoya; H Maruyama; Y Kato; Y Oe; Y Horiuchi; H Takeda; N Tanahashi Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: Mirko Seifert; Alexander Ahlbrecht; Christian Dohmen; Elmar Spuentrup; Walter Moeller-Hartmann Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2010-06-17 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Albert J Yoo; Luis A Verduzco; Pamela W Schaefer; Joshua A Hirsch; James D Rabinov; R Gilberto González Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: E I Levy; R Mehta; R Gupta; R A Hanel; A J Chamczuk; D Fiorella; H H Woo; F C Albuquerque; T G Jovin; M B Horowitz; L N Hopkins Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Marc Ribo; Carlos A Molina; Beatriz Alvarez; Marta Rubiera; Jose Alvarez-Sabin; Manel Matas Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2009-02-13 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: A Lindenholz; I C van der Schaaf; A G van der Kolk; H B van der Worp; A A Harteveld; L J Kappelle; J Hendrikse Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Michael P Marks; Maarten G Lansberg; Michael Mlynash; Stephanie Kemp; Ryan McTaggart; Greg Zaharchuk; Roland Bammer; Gregory W Albers Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Niels von Gadow; Omid Nikoubashman; Jessica Freiherr; Frank Block; Arno Reich; Gunther Fesl; Martin Wiesmann Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2017-02
Authors: Mark L Leekoff; Julia E Masur; Allen P Burke; Jeremy S Pollock; Matthew N Peters; Si M Pham; Timothy R Miller; John W Cole Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: C Dargazanli; A Consoli; M Barral; J Labreuche; H Redjem; G Ciccio; S Smajda; J P Desilles; G Taylor; C Preda; O Coskun; G Rodesch; M Piotin; R Blanc; B Lapergue Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-11-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sung E Park; Dae S Choi; Hye J Baek; Kyeong H Ryu; Ji Y Ha; Ho C Choi; Sangmin Lee; Jungho Won; Seunguk Jung Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Feras Akbik; Joshua A Hirsch; Pedro Telles Cougo-Pinto; Ronil V Chandra; Claus Z Simonsen; Thabele Leslie-Mazwi Journal: Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med Date: 2016-05