Elizabeth Tong1, Jim Patrie2, Sara Tong3, Avery Evans2, Patrik Michel4, Ashraf Eskandari4, Max Wintermark5. 1. Department of Neuroradiology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. liztong@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedics, Tseung Kwan O Hospital, Tseung Kwan O, Hong Kong. 4. Department of Neurology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. 5. Department of Neuroradiology, Stanford Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Collateral circulation plays a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of acute ischemic stroke and is increasingly recognized as a promising biomarker for predicting the clinical outcome. However, there is no single established grading system. We designed a novel machine-learning software that allows non-invasive, objective, and quantitative assessment of collaterals according to their vascular territories. Our goal is to investigate the prognostic and predictive value of this collateral score for the prediction of acute stroke outcome. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 135 patients with anterior circulation stroke treated with IV TPA. An equation using this collateral score (adjusting for age, baseline NIHSS, and recanalization) was derived to predict the clinical outcome (90-day mRS). The primary analyses focused on determining the prognostic value of our newly developed collateral scores. Secondary analyses examined the interrelationships between the collateral score and other variables. RESULTS: The collateral score emerged as a statistically significant prognostic biomarker for good clinical outcome (p < 0.033) among recanalized patients, but not among non-recanalized patients (p < 0.497). Our results also showed that collateral score was a predictive biomarker (p < 0.044). These results suggest that (1) patients with good collateral score derive more benefit from successful recanalization than patients with poor collateral score and (2) collateral status is inconsequential if recanalization is not achieved. CONCLUSION: Our data results reinforce the importance of careful patient selection for recanalization therapy to avoid futile recanalization. The paucity of collaterals predicts poor clinical outcome despite recanalization. On the other hand, robust collaterals warrant consideration for recanalization therapy given the better odds of good clinical outcome.
PURPOSE: Collateral circulation plays a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of acute ischemic stroke and is increasingly recognized as a promising biomarker for predicting the clinical outcome. However, there is no single established grading system. We designed a novel machine-learning software that allows non-invasive, objective, and quantitative assessment of collaterals according to their vascular territories. Our goal is to investigate the prognostic and predictive value of this collateral score for the prediction of acute stroke outcome. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 135 patients with anterior circulation stroke treated with IV TPA. An equation using this collateral score (adjusting for age, baseline NIHSS, and recanalization) was derived to predict the clinical outcome (90-day mRS). The primary analyses focused on determining the prognostic value of our newly developed collateral scores. Secondary analyses examined the interrelationships between the collateral score and other variables. RESULTS: The collateral score emerged as a statistically significant prognostic biomarker for good clinical outcome (p < 0.033) among recanalized patients, but not among non-recanalized patients (p < 0.497). Our results also showed that collateral score was a predictive biomarker (p < 0.044). These results suggest that (1) patients with good collateral score derive more benefit from successful recanalization than patients with poor collateral score and (2) collateral status is inconsequential if recanalization is not achieved. CONCLUSION: Our data results reinforce the importance of careful patient selection for recanalization therapy to avoid futile recanalization. The paucity of collaterals predicts poor clinical outcome despite recanalization. On the other hand, robust collaterals warrant consideration for recanalization therapy given the better odds of good clinical outcome.
Authors: Michal Tendera; Victor Aboyans; Marie-Louise Bartelink; Iris Baumgartner; Denis Clément; Jean-Philippe Collet; Alberto Cremonesi; Marco De Carlo; Raimund Erbel; F Gerry R Fowkes; Magda Heras; Serge Kownator; Erich Minar; Jan Ostergren; Don Poldermans; Vincent Riambau; Marco Roffi; Joachim Röther; Horst Sievert; Marc van Sambeek; Thomas Zeller Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Bijoy K Menon; Christopher D d'Esterre; Emmad M Qazi; Mohammed Almekhlafi; Leszek Hahn; Andrew M Demchuk; Mayank Goyal Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Oh Young Bang; Jeffrey L Saver; Suk Jae Kim; Gyeong-Moon Kim; Chin-Sang Chung; Bruce Ovbiagele; Kwang Ho Lee; David S Liebeskind Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-01-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Gillian L Gordon Perue; Ram Narayan; Amir H Zangiabadi; Jose G Romano; Tatjana Rundek; Ralph L Sacco; Sebastian Koch Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2014-07-18 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Jessica C Tan; William P Dillon; Songling Liu; Felix Adler; Wade S Smith; Max Wintermark Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 10.422