| Literature DB >> 28178411 |
Ji Hoe Heo1, Kyeonsub Kim1, Joonsang Yoo1, Young Dae Kim1, Hyo Suk Nam1, Eung Yeop Kim2.
Abstract
The prediction of successful recanalization following thrombolytic or endovascular treatment may be helpful to determine the strategy of recanalization treatment in acute stroke. Thrombus can be detected using noncontrast computed tomography (CT) as a hyperdense artery sign or blooming artifact on a T2*-weighted gradient-recalled image. The detection of thrombus using CT depends on slice thickness. Thrombus burden can be determined in terms of the length, volume, and clot burden score. The thrombus size can be quantitatively measured on thin-section CT or CT angiography/magnetic resonance angiography. The determination of thrombus size may be predictive of successful recanalization/non-recanalization after intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular treatment. However, cut-offs of thrombus size for predicting recanalization/non-recanalization are different among studies, due to different methods of measurements. Thus, a standardized method to measure the thrombus is necessary for thrombus imaging to be useful and reliable in clinical practice. Software-based measurements may provide a reliable and accurate assessment. The measurement should be easy and rapid to be more widely used in practice, which could be achieved by improvement of the user interface. In addition to prediction of recanalization, sequential measurements of thrombus volume before and after the treatment may also be useful to determine the efficacy of new thrombolytic drugs. This manuscript reviews the diagnosis of thrombus, prediction of recanalization using thrombus imaging, and practical considerations for the measurement of thrombus burden and density on CT.Entities:
Keywords: Endovascular procedure; Imaging; Therapeutic thrombolysis; Thrombus; Tomography; X-ray computed
Year: 2017 PMID: 28178411 PMCID: PMC5307933 DOI: 10.5853/jos.2016.01522
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Stroke ISSN: 2287-6391 Impact factor: 6.967
Thrombus burden and recanalization (IV thrombolysis)
| Author (year) | Patient No. | Artery | Imaging (CT thickness, mm) | Method | Association with recanalization |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim, 2006 [ | 8 | MCA | NCCT (1.25) | Volume | No (58.8±52.7 vs. 44.36±66.5, |
| Riedel, 2011 [ | 138 | Not specified | NCCT (2.5) | Length | Yes (cut-off 8 mm, |
| Shobha, 2013 [ | 41 | M1 | NCCT (5.0) | Length | Yes (86% vs. 37% vs. 0%, |
| Behrens, 2014 [ | 96 | Any intracranial | CTA, MRA | Length | Yes (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.95, |
| No recanalization in thrombus > 16 mm | |||||
| Rohan, 2014 [ | 80 | M1 | CTA | Length | Yes (cut-off 12 mm, sensitivity 0.67, specificity 0.71, OR 4.81, 95% CI 1.86-12.40) |
| Strbian, 2014 [ | 103 | BA | CTA, MRA | Length | Yes (15 [6-25] vs. 5.5 [3.6-15.4], |
CT, computed tomography; MCA, middle cerebral artery; NCCT, noncontrast computed tomography; CTA, computed tomography angiography; MRA, magnetic resonance angiography; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; BA, basilar artery.
Recanalization vs. nonrecanallization, mm3;
thrombus length <10 mm vs. 10-19 mm vs. 20 mm, percent for the disappearance of hyperdense artery sign on follow-up scan;
decreased probability of recanalization per mm.
Thrombus burden and recanalization (endovascular treatment)
| Author (year) | Patient No. | Artery | Primary treatment modality | Imaging (CT thickness, mm) | Method | Association with recanalization[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim, 2006 [ | 12 | MCA | IAT | NCCT (1.25) | Volume | No (39.2±37.4 vs. 123.5±169.1, |
| 14 | IVT+IAT | No (106.1±94.5 vs. 79.2±61.8, | ||||
| Spiotta, 2014 [ | 122 | MCA | Penumbra, | CTA | Length | No (13.3±10.0 vs. 13.5±7.6, |
| Shobha, 2013 [ | 35 | M1 | Not specified | NCCT (5.0) | Length | Yes (60% vs. 33% vs. 50%, |
| Mokin, 2014 [ | 41 | ICA, M1, M2 | Solitaire | NCCT (5.0) | No | |
| CBS | 6.6±1.1 vs. 6.6±1.8, | |||||
| Volume, | 101.0±81.0 vs. 89.8±65.0, | |||||
| Length | 12.2±4.7 vs. 14.0±6.0, | |||||
| Jindal, 2014 [ | 28 | M1, ICA | Penumbra, Solitaire, Trevo | SWI, CTA, NCCT | length | No, |
| Soize, 2015 [ | 153 | Any intracranial | Solitaire | GRE | Length | 15.4±8.4 vs. 20.1±9.0, |
| 18 (sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.57, OR 3.09) | ||||||
| Angermailer, 2016 | 63 | MCA, ICA | Stent retriever | CTA | CBS | No (7 [6-8] vs. 6 [4.5-7.0], |
| Mokin, 2016 | 69 | MCA, ICA | Solitaire | CTA | CBS | No (6.5±1.7 vs. 7.3±1.3, |
| Treurniet, 2016 | 499 | MCA, ICA | Solitaire | CTA | CBS | Yes (model A: OR, 1.25, 95% CI, 1.13-1.81, model B: OR 1.27, 95% CI, 1.14–1.41)[ |
Values are mean±standard deviation, median [interquartile range], or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
The volume is presented as mm3, and the length is presented as mm.
CT, computed tomography; MCA, middle cerebral artery; IAT, intra-arterial thrombolysis; NCCT, noncontrast computed tomography; IVT, intravenous thrombolysis; ICA, internal carotid artery; M1, M1 segment of MCA; CTA, computed tomography angiography; SWI, susceptibility-weighted imaging; GRE, gradient-recalled echo; CBS, clot burden score.
Recanalization (TICI≥2) vs. nonrecanallization (TICI<2);
thrombus length <10 mm vs. 10-19 mm vs. 20 mm, percent for the disappearance of hyperdense artery sign on follow-up scan;
odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) based on two different statistical models.
Methods to measure the thrombus size and burden
| Volume | Length | Clot burden score | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| On NCCT | On angiography | |||
| Imaging tool | Thin-section NCCT | Thin-section NCCT | CTA, MRA | CTA, MRA |
| Thrombus measurement | Direct | Direct | Indirect based on absence of contrast opacification | Indirect based on absence of contrast opacification |
| Measurement method | Pixel segmentation, region growing, and automatic calculation using 3-dimensional imaging software | Pixel segmentation and Euclidean length measurement after reducing to skeleton using software | Measurement using free-hand curve function on MIP image after post processing procedure | Visual scoring based on determining the absence of contrast opacification in the predefined locations |
| Measurable artery | Any intracranial artery | Usually proximal segment of intracranial artery | Any intracranial artery | Anterior circulation |
| Accuracy | Close to actual thrombus burden (volume) | Close to actual thrombus length | Can be overestimated | Approximate burden Can be overestimated |
| Practical use | Requires software | Requires software | Requires postprocessing | Easy and rapid by visual assessment |
NCCT, noncontrast computed tomography; CTA, computed tomography angiography; MRA, magnetic resonance angiography; MIP, multiple projection images.
Figure 1.A representative case for the measurement of thrombus length. Hyperdense artery sign is seen on thin-section noncontrast computed angiography (CT) scan (arrows) (A). Measurement of thrombus length on this plain CT is almost impossible (A). An imaginary line (green dotted line) is drawn to measure the length on CT angiography (B, C). The actual location of the thrombus (D), which was visualized using 3-dimensional software (E), was superimposed on the imaginary lines of the actual angioarchitecture based on the angiographic findings after successful retrieval of thrombi using Solitaire stent (F). The thrombus length is overestimated on CT angiography, and thrombus in the bifurcated branch cannot be measured (D).
Thrombus density on CT and recanalization
| Thickness (mm) | Method of ROI drawing | Recanalization assessment | Treatment modality | Patient No. | Recanalization mean±SD HU (relative HU[ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||||
| Kim, 2006 [ | 1.25 | Automatic | Within 1 day | IVT | 8 | 55±3.2 | 48.4±3.2 | 0.043 |
| IAT | 12 | 53.8±2.9 | 49.5±2.4 | 0.025 | ||||
| IVT+IAT | 14 | 53.2±2.7 | 47.3±2.9 | 0.009 (< 49.5) | ||||
| Puig, 2011 [ | 3.0 | Manually outlined the margin | 1 hour | IVT | 45 | 49.3 (1.57±0.23) | 42.1 (1.11±0.15) | < 0.001 (<1.382) |
| Moftakhar, 2012 [ | 2.5 | Manually drawn within thrombus | Not specified | IVT | 45 | 1.58 | 1.39 | 0.01 |
| IAT | 43 | 1.66 | 1.4 | 0.006 | ||||
| IVT+EVT | 77 | 1.7 | 1.3 | < 0.0001 | ||||
| Mokin, 2014 [ | 5.0 | Manually outlined the margin | at EVT | IVT+stent | 41 | 49.9±7.6 (1.2±0.2) | 43.8±6.6 (1.0±0.1) | 0.01 |
| 0.03 | ||||||||
| Nielsten, 2014 [ | 1.0 | Manually drawn small circles | 1-5 days | IVT | 88 | 63.1±10.7 (1.54±0.23) | 52.2±9.5 (1.29±0.20) | <0.0001 (<56.5, <1.38) |
| Spiotta, 2014 [ | 4.8 | Manually drawn small circles | at EVT | IVT/IAT | 137 | 57.1±16.3 | 68.7±43.2 | 0.22 |
| IVT+Penumbra | ||||||||
CT, computed tomography; SD, standard deviation; ROI, region of interest; HU, hounsfield unit; IVT, intravenous thrombolysis; IAT, intra-arterial thrombolysis; EVT, endovascular treatment.
Relative HU is calculated as HU of symptomatic side/HU of asymptomatic side;
Cut-off for persistent occlusion.
Figure 2.A representative case with perviousness. A 78-year-old man who presented with right-side weakness and sensory aphasia. Non-enhanced CT shows a “hyperdense” thrombus (arrowhead) in the bifurcation of the left middle cerebral artery (MCA), which corresponds to the occlusion on computed tomography angiography (CTA) (arrowhead) (A, B). Dynamic CTA shows gradual enhancement in the thrombus (arrowheads). This gradual enhancement indicates the perviousness of a contrast agent into the thrombus (C). Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) was administered after obtaining dynamic CTA. Digital subtraction angiography taken 2 hours after tPA demonstrates complete recanalization of left MCA (D).