Nishant K Mishra1, Søren Christensen1, Anke Wouters1, Bruce C V Campbell1, Matus Straka1, Michael Mlynash1, Stephanie Kemp1, Carlo W Cereda1, Roland Bammer1, Michael P Marks1, Gregory W Albers1, Maarten G Lansberg2. 1. From the Stanford Stroke Center, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA (N.K.M., S.C., M.S., M.M., S.K., C.W.C., G.W.A., M.G.L.); Department of Experimental Neurology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (A.W.); Department of Medicine and Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (B.C.V.C.); Stroke Center, Department of Neurology, Neurocenter (EOC) of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland (C.W.C.); and Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, CA (R.B., M.P.M.). 2. From the Stanford Stroke Center, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA (N.K.M., S.C., M.S., M.M., S.K., C.W.C., G.W.A., M.G.L.); Department of Experimental Neurology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (A.W.); Department of Medicine and Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (B.C.V.C.); Stroke Center, Department of Neurology, Neurocenter (EOC) of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland (C.W.C.); and Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, CA (R.B., M.P.M.). lansberg@stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ischemic stroke patients with regional very low cerebral blood volume (VLCBV) on baseline imaging have increased risk of parenchymal hemorrhage (PH) after intravenous alteplase-induced reperfusion. We developed a method for automated detection of VLCBV and examined whether patients with reperfused-VLCBV are at increased risk of PH after endovascular reperfusion therapy. METHODS: Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to optimize a relative CBV threshold associated with PH in patients from the Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution 2 (DEFUSE 2) study. Regional reperfused-VLCBV was defined as regions with low relative CBV on baseline imaging that demonstrated normal perfusion (Tmax <6 s) on coregistered early follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. The association between VLCBV, regional reperfused-VLCBV and PH was assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In 91 patients, the greatest area under the curve for predicting PH occurred at an relative CBV threshold of <0.42 (area under the curve, 0.77). At this threshold, VLCBV lesion volume ≥3.55 mL optimally predicted PH with 94% sensitivity and 63% specificity. Reperfused-VLCBV lesion volume was more specific (0.74) and equally sensitive (0.94). In total, 18 patients developed PH, of whom 17 presented with VLCBV (39% versus 2%; P=0.001), all of them had regional reperfusion (47% versus 0%; P=0.01), and 71% received intravenous alteplase. VLCBV lesion (odds ratio, 33) and bridging with intravenous alteplase (odds ratio, 3.8) were independently associated with PH. In a separate model, reperfused-VLCBV remained the single independent predictor of PH (odds ratio, 53). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that VLCBV can be used for risk stratification of patients scheduled to undergo endovascular therapy in trials and routine clinical practice.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Ischemic strokepatients with regional very low cerebral blood volume (VLCBV) on baseline imaging have increased risk of parenchymal hemorrhage (PH) after intravenous alteplase-induced reperfusion. We developed a method for automated detection of VLCBV and examined whether patients with reperfused-VLCBV are at increased risk of PH after endovascular reperfusion therapy. METHODS: Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to optimize a relative CBV threshold associated with PH in patients from the Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution 2 (DEFUSE 2) study. Regional reperfused-VLCBV was defined as regions with low relative CBV on baseline imaging that demonstrated normal perfusion (Tmax <6 s) on coregistered early follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. The association between VLCBV, regional reperfused-VLCBV and PH was assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In 91 patients, the greatest area under the curve for predicting PH occurred at an relative CBV threshold of <0.42 (area under the curve, 0.77). At this threshold, VLCBV lesion volume ≥3.55 mL optimally predicted PH with 94% sensitivity and 63% specificity. Reperfused-VLCBV lesion volume was more specific (0.74) and equally sensitive (0.94). In total, 18 patients developed PH, of whom 17 presented with VLCBV (39% versus 2%; P=0.001), all of them had regional reperfusion (47% versus 0%; P=0.01), and 71% received intravenous alteplase. VLCBV lesion (odds ratio, 33) and bridging with intravenous alteplase (odds ratio, 3.8) were independently associated with PH. In a separate model, reperfused-VLCBV remained the single independent predictor of PH (odds ratio, 53). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that VLCBV can be used for risk stratification of patients scheduled to undergo endovascular therapy in trials and routine clinical practice.
Authors: Raul G Nogueira; Rishi Gupta; Tudor G Jovin; Elad I Levy; David S Liebeskind; Osama O Zaidat; Ansaar Rai; Joshua A Hirsch; Daniel P Hsu; Marilyn M Rymer; Ashis H Tayal; Ridwan Lin; Sabareesh K Natarajan; Ashish Nanda; Melissa Tian; Qing Hao; Junaid S Kalia; Michael Chen; Alex Abou-Chebl; Thanh N Nguyen; Albert J Yoo Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Tareq Kass-Hout; Omar Kass-Hout; Maxim Mokin; Danielle M Thesier; Parham Yashar; David Orion; Shady Jahshan; L Nelson Hopkins; Adnan H Siddiqui; Kenneth V Snyder; Elad I Levy Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2013-02-01 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Michael Mlynash; Irina Eyngorn; Roland Bammer; Michael Moseley; David C Tong Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Randall T Higashida; Anthony J Furlan; Heidi Roberts; Thomas Tomsick; Buddy Connors; John Barr; William Dillon; Steven Warach; Joseph Broderick; Barbara Tilley; David Sacks Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-07-17 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Søren Christensen; Mark W Parsons; Leonid Churilov; Patricia M Desmond; P Alan Barber; Kenneth S Butcher; Christopher R Levi; Deidre A De Silva; Maarten G Lansberg; Michael Mlynash; Jean-Marc Olivot; Matus Straka; Roland Bammer; Gregory W Albers; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: W Hacke; M Kaste; C Fieschi; R von Kummer; A Davalos; D Meier; V Larrue; E Bluhmki; S Davis; G Donnan; D Schneider; E Diez-Tejedor; P Trouillas Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-10-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Oliver C Singer; Marek C Humpich; Jens Fiehler; Gregory W Albers; Maarten G Lansberg; Andiras Kastrup; Alex Rovira; David S Liebeskind; Achim Gass; Charlotte Rosso; Laurent Derex; Jong S Kim; Tobias Neumann-Haefelin Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Wolfgang G Kunz; Wieland H Sommer; Christopher Höhne; Matthias P Fabritius; Felix Schuler; Franziska Dorn; Ahmed E Othman; Felix G Meinel; Louisa von Baumgarten; Maximilian F Reiser; Birgit Ertl-Wagner; Kolja M Thierfelder Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Manus J Donahue; Eric Achten; Petrice M Cogswell; Frank-Erik De Leeuw; Colin P Derdeyn; Rick M Dijkhuizen; Audrey P Fan; Rashid Ghaznawi; Jeremy J Heit; M Arfan Ikram; Peter Jezzard; Lori C Jordan; Eric Jouvent; Linda Knutsson; Richard Leigh; David S Liebeskind; Weili Lin; Thomas W Okell; Adnan I Qureshi; Charlotte J Stagg; Matthias Jp van Osch; Peter Cm van Zijl; Jennifer M Watchmaker; Max Wintermark; Ona Wu; Greg Zaharchuk; Jinyuan Zhou; Jeroen Hendrikse Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: V Yogendrakumar; F Al-Ajlan; M Najm; J Puig; A Calleja; S-I Sohn; S H Ahn; R Mikulik; N Asdaghi; T S Field; A Jin; T Asil; J-M Boulanger; M D Hill; A M Demchuk; B K Menon; D Dowlatshahi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Won Hyung A Ryu; Michael B Avery; Navjit Dharampal; Isabel E Allen; Steven W Hetts Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Kambiz Nael; James R Knitter; Reza Jahan; Jeffery Gornbein; Zahra Ajani; Lei Feng; Brett C Meyer; Lee H Schwamm; Albert J Yoo; Randolph S Marshall; Philip M Meyers; Dileep R Yavagal; Max Wintermark; David S Liebeskind; Judy Guzy; Sidney Starkman; Jeffrey L Saver; Chelsea S Kidwell Journal: Stroke Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Huu An Nguyen; Dang Luu Vu; Quang Anh Nguyen; Duy Ton Mai; Anh Tuan Tran; Hoang Kien Le; Tat Thien Nguyen; Thu Trang Nguyen; Cuong Tran; Viet Phuong Dao; Laurent Pierot Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.086