T Struffert1, Y Deuerling-Zheng2, S Kloska3, T Engelhorn3, S Lang3, A Mennecke3, M Manhart4, C M Strother5, S Schwab6, A Doerfler3. 1. From the Department of Neuroradiology (T.S., S.K., T.E., S.L., A.M., M.M., A.D.) tobias.struffert@uk-erlangen.de. 2. Siemens AG, Healthcare Sector (Y.D.-Z.), Forchheim, Germany. 3. From the Department of Neuroradiology (T.S., S.K., T.E., S.L., A.M., M.M., A.D.). 4. From the Department of Neuroradiology (T.S., S.K., T.E., S.L., A.M., M.M., A.D.) Pattern Recognition Lab (M.M.). 5. Department of Radiology (C.M.S.), University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin. 6. Department of Neurology (S.S.), University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Perfusion and angiographic imaging using intravenous contrast application to evaluate stroke patients is now technically feasible by flat detector CT performed by the angiographic system. The aim of this pilot study was to show the feasibility and qualitative comparability of a novel flat detector CT dynamic perfusion and angiographic imaging protocol in comparison with a multimodal stroke MR imaging protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 12 patients with acute stroke, MR imaging and the novel flat detector CT protocol were performed before endovascular treatment. Perfusion parameter maps (MTT, TTP, CBV, CBF) and MIP/volume-rendering technique images obtained by using both modalities (MR imaging and flat detector CT) were compared. RESULTS: Comparison of MIP/volume-rendering technique images demonstrated equivalent visibility of the occlusion site. Qualitative comparison of perfusion parameter maps by using ASPECTS revealed high Pearson correlation coefficients for parameters CBF, MTT, and TTP (0.95-0.98), while for CBV, the coefficient was lower (0.49). CONCLUSIONS: We have shown the feasibility of a novel dynamic flat detector CT perfusion and angiographic protocol for the diagnosis and triage of patients with acute ischemic stroke. In a qualitative comparison, the parameter maps and MIP/volume-rendering technique images compared well with MR imaging. In our opinion, this flat detector CT application may substitute for multisection CT imaging in selected patients with acute stroke so that in the future, patients with acute stroke may be directly referred to the angiography suite, thereby avoiding transportation and saving time.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Perfusion and angiographic imaging using intravenous contrast application to evaluate strokepatients is now technically feasible by flat detector CT performed by the angiographic system. The aim of this pilot study was to show the feasibility and qualitative comparability of a novel flat detector CT dynamic perfusion and angiographic imaging protocol in comparison with a multimodal stroke MR imaging protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 12 patients with acute stroke, MR imaging and the novel flat detector CT protocol were performed before endovascular treatment. Perfusion parameter maps (MTT, TTP, CBV, CBF) and MIP/volume-rendering technique images obtained by using both modalities (MR imaging and flat detector CT) were compared. RESULTS: Comparison of MIP/volume-rendering technique images demonstrated equivalent visibility of the occlusion site. Qualitative comparison of perfusion parameter maps by using ASPECTS revealed high Pearson correlation coefficients for parameters CBF, MTT, and TTP (0.95-0.98), while for CBV, the coefficient was lower (0.49). CONCLUSIONS: We have shown the feasibility of a novel dynamic flat detector CT perfusion and angiographic protocol for the diagnosis and triage of patients with acute ischemic stroke. In a qualitative comparison, the parameter maps and MIP/volume-rendering technique images compared well with MR imaging. In our opinion, this flat detector CT application may substitute for multisection CT imaging in selected patients with acute stroke so that in the future, patients with acute stroke may be directly referred to the angiography suite, thereby avoiding transportation and saving time.
Authors: M Cohnen; H-J Wittsack; S Assadi; K Muskalla; A Ringelstein; L W Poll; A Saleh; U Mödder Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Ganguly; A Fieselmann; M Marks; J Rosenberg; J Boese; Y Deuerling-Zheng; M Straka; G Zaharchuk; R Bammer; R Fahrig Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-07-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M Saake; P Goelitz; T Struffert; L Breuer; B Volbers; A Doerfler; S Kloska Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: T Struffert; Y Deuerling-Zheng; S Kloska; T Engelhorn; C M Strother; W A Kalender; M Köhrmann; S Schwab; A Doerfler Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K Royalty; M Manhart; K Pulfer; Y Deuerling-Zheng; C Strother; A Fieselmann; D Consigny Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: R I Aviv; J Mandelcorn; S Chakraborty; D Gladstone; S Malham; G Tomlinson; A J Fox; S Symons Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-10-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Niko Sillanpaa; Jukka T Saarinen; Harri Rusanen; Jari Hakomaki; Arto Lahteela; Heikki Numminen; Irina Elovaara; Prasun Dastidar; Seppo Soimakallio Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Extra Date: 2011-02-17
Authors: A Brehm; I Tsogkas; I L Maier; H J Eisenberger; P Yang; J-M Liu; J Liman; M-N Psychogios Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K Niu; P Yang; Y Wu; T Struffert; A Doerfler; S Schafer; K Royalty; C Strother; G-H Chen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Chun Fu Lin; Sanford P C Hsu; Chung Jung Lin; Wan Yuo Guo; Chih Hsiang Liao; Wei Fa Chu; Sheng Che Hung; Yang Shin Shih; Yen Tzu Lin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: T Nozaki; M Noda; T Ishibashi; K Otani; M Kogiku; K Abe; H Kishi; A Morita Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-12-24 Impact factor: 3.825