M Lou1, Z Chen2, J Wan2, H Hu2, X Cai2, Z Shi2, J Sun3. 1. From the Departments of Neurology (M.L., Z.C., J.W., H.H., X.C., Z.S.) hzzjsjz@163.com loumingxc@vip.sina.com. 2. From the Departments of Neurology (M.L., Z.C., J.W., H.H., X.C., Z.S.). 3. Radiology (J.S.), the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China. hzzjsjz@163.com loumingxc@vip.sina.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Asymmetric hypointensity of cerebral veins on susceptibility-weighted imaging has been shown to indirectly reflect tissue hypoxia after cerebral ischemia. We therefore investigated whether patients with prominent asymmetry of the cerebral veins on SWI and a relatively small diffusion-weighted imaging lesion (SWI-DWI mismatch), representing the presence of salvageable tissue, were more likely to benefit from thrombolytic therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of the anterior circulation of patients with ischemic stroke with SWI/DWI acquired before thrombolysis. The asymmetry index was defined as the ratio of cerebral vein voxel count between the ischemic and normal hemisphere on the SWI phase map. We defined SWI-DWI mismatch as an asymmetry index score of ≥1.75 with a DWI lesion volume of ≤25 mL. Favorable outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale 0-2 at 3 months. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between the mismatch profile and favorable outcome. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients undergoing thrombolytic treatment were enrolled in this study. The rate of favorable outcome was significantly higher among patients with baseline SWI-DWI mismatch compared with those without (78% versus 44%; adjusted odds ratio, 6.317; 95% CI, 1.12-35.80; P = .037). Patients with SWI-DWI mismatch were also more likely to have a favorable outcome from reperfusion (91% versus 43%, P = .033) or recanalization (100% versus 40%, P = .013). The accuracy of SWI-DWI mismatch for predicting favorable outcome was higher than that of perfusion-diffusion mismatch (63% versus 48.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of SWI-DWI mismatch may identify patients with ischemia who would benefit from early reperfusion therapy.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Asymmetric hypointensity of cerebral veins on susceptibility-weighted imaging has been shown to indirectly reflect tissue hypoxia after cerebral ischemia. We therefore investigated whether patients with prominent asymmetry of the cerebral veins on SWI and a relatively small diffusion-weighted imaging lesion (SWI-DWI mismatch), representing the presence of salvageable tissue, were more likely to benefit from thrombolytic therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of the anterior circulation of patients with ischemic stroke with SWI/DWI acquired before thrombolysis. The asymmetry index was defined as the ratio of cerebral vein voxel count between the ischemic and normal hemisphere on the SWI phase map. We defined SWI-DWI mismatch as an asymmetry index score of ≥1.75 with a DWI lesion volume of ≤25 mL. Favorable outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale 0-2 at 3 months. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between the mismatch profile and favorable outcome. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients undergoing thrombolytic treatment were enrolled in this study. The rate of favorable outcome was significantly higher among patients with baseline SWI-DWI mismatch compared with those without (78% versus 44%; adjusted odds ratio, 6.317; 95% CI, 1.12-35.80; P = .037). Patients with SWI-DWI mismatch were also more likely to have a favorable outcome from reperfusion (91% versus 43%, P = .033) or recanalization (100% versus 40%, P = .013). The accuracy of SWI-DWI mismatch for predicting favorable outcome was higher than that of perfusion-diffusion mismatch (63% versus 48.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of SWI-DWI mismatch may identify patients with ischemia who would benefit from early reperfusion therapy.
Authors: Gregory W Albers; Vincent N Thijs; Lawrence Wechsler; Stephanie Kemp; Gottfried Schlaug; Elaine Skalabrin; Roland Bammer; Wataru Kakuda; Maarten G Lansberg; Ashfaq Shuaib; William Coplin; Scott Hamilton; Michael Moseley; Michael P Marks Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: A M Hakim; A C Evans; L Berger; H Kuwabara; K Worsley; G Marchal; C Biel; R Pokrupa; M Diksic; E Meyer Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 1989-08 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Edward C Jauch; Jeffrey L Saver; Harold P Adams; Askiel Bruno; J J Buddy Connors; Bart M Demaerschalk; Pooja Khatri; Paul W McMullan; Adnan I Qureshi; Kenneth Rosenfield; Phillip A Scott; Debbie R Summers; David Z Wang; Max Wintermark; Howard Yonas Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Wataru Kakuda; Maarten G Lansberg; Vincent N Thijs; Stephanie M Kemp; Roland Bammer; Lawrence R Wechsler; Michael E Moseley; Michael P Marks; Michael P Parks; Gregory W Albers Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2008-01-09 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Charlie Chia-Tsong Hsu; Gigi Nga Chi Kwan; Sachintha Hapugoda; Michelle Craigie; Trevor William Watkins; E Mark Haacke Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2017-01-01
Authors: X Yu; L Yuan; A Jackson; J Sun; P Huang; X Xu; Y Mao; M Lou; Q Jiang; M Zhang Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Seyedmehdi Payabvash; John C Benson; Shayandokht Taleb; Jeffrey B Rykken; Benjamin Hoffman; Mark C Oswood; Alexander M McKinney Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: S Mundiyanapurath; M Möhlenbruch; P A Ringleb; J Bösel; W Wick; M Bendszus; A Radbruch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 3.240