Lars-Arne Schaafs1,2, David Porter3, Heinrich J Audebert4, Jochen B Fiebach5, Kersten Villringer5. 1. Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203, Berlin, Germany. lars-arne.schaafs@charite.de. 2. Academic Neuroradiology, Department of Neurology and Center for Stroke Research, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. lars-arne.schaafs@charite.de. 3. Fraunhofer Institute for Medical Image Computing MEVIS, Bremen, Germany. 4. Department of Neurology with Experimental Neurology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. 5. Academic Neuroradiology, Department of Neurology and Center for Stroke Research, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Perfusion imaging (PI) is susceptible to confounding factors such as motion artefacts as well as delay and dispersion (D/D). We evaluate the influence of different post-processing algorithms on hypoperfusion assessment in PI analysis software packages to improve the clinical accuracy of stroke PI. METHODS: Fifty patients with acute ischaemic stroke underwent MRI imaging in the first 24 h after onset. Diverging approaches to motion and D/D correction were applied. The calculated MTT and CBF perfusion maps were assessed by volumetry of lesions and tested for agreement with a standard approach and with the final lesion volume (FLV) on day 6 in patients with persisting vessel occlusion. RESULTS: MTT map lesion volumes were significantly smaller throughout the software packages with correction of motion and D/D when compared to the commonly used approach with no correction (p = 0.001-0.022). Volumes on CBF maps did not differ significantly (p = 0.207-0.925). All packages with advanced post-processing algorithms showed a high level of agreement with FLV (ICC = 0.704-0.879). CONCLUSIONS: Correction of D/D had a significant influence on estimated lesion volumes and leads to significantly smaller lesion volumes on MTT maps. This may improve patient selection. KEY POINTS: • Assessment on hypoperfusion using advanced post-processing with correction for motion and D/D. • CBF appears to be more robust regarding differences in post-processing. • Tissue at risk is estimated more accurately by correcting software algorithms. • Advanced post-processing algorithms show a higher agreement with the final lesion volume.
OBJECTIVES: Perfusion imaging (PI) is susceptible to confounding factors such as motion artefacts as well as delay and dispersion (D/D). We evaluate the influence of different post-processing algorithms on hypoperfusion assessment in PI analysis software packages to improve the clinical accuracy of stroke PI. METHODS: Fifty patients with acute ischaemic stroke underwent MRI imaging in the first 24 h after onset. Diverging approaches to motion and D/D correction were applied. The calculated MTT and CBF perfusion maps were assessed by volumetry of lesions and tested for agreement with a standard approach and with the final lesion volume (FLV) on day 6 in patients with persisting vessel occlusion. RESULTS:MTT map lesion volumes were significantly smaller throughout the software packages with correction of motion and D/D when compared to the commonly used approach with no correction (p = 0.001-0.022). Volumes on CBF maps did not differ significantly (p = 0.207-0.925). All packages with advanced post-processing algorithms showed a high level of agreement with FLV (ICC = 0.704-0.879). CONCLUSIONS: Correction of D/D had a significant influence on estimated lesion volumes and leads to significantly smaller lesion volumes on MTT maps. This may improve patient selection. KEY POINTS: • Assessment on hypoperfusion using advanced post-processing with correction for motion and D/D. • CBF appears to be more robust regarding differences in post-processing. • Tissue at risk is estimated more accurately by correcting software algorithms. • Advanced post-processing algorithms show a higher agreement with the final lesion volume.
Authors: Peter Brunecker; Matthias Endres; Christian H Nolte; Jörg Schultze; Susanne Wegener; Gerhard Jan Jungehülsing; Bianca Müller; Christian M Kerskens; Jochen B Fiebach; Arno Villringer; Jens Steinbrink Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Lisa Willats; Soren Christensen; Henry K Ma; Geoffrey A Donnan; Alan Connelly; Fernando Calamante Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Werner Hacke; Greg Albers; Yasir Al-Rawi; Julien Bogousslavsky; Antonio Davalos; Michael Eliasziw; Michael Fischer; Anthony Furlan; Markku Kaste; Kennedy R Lees; Mariola Soehngen; Steven Warach Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Johannes Budjan; Ulrike I Attenberger; Stefan O Schoenberg; Hubertus Pietsch; Gregor Jost Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Raphael Meier; Paula Lux; B Med; Simon Jung; Urs Fischer; Jan Gralla; Mauricio Reyes; Roland Wiest; Richard McKinley; Johannes Kaesmacher Journal: Radiol Artif Intell Date: 2019-09-11