| Literature DB >> 29276498 |
Hee Young Choi1, Kyung Mi Lee1, Hyug-Gi Kim1, Eui Jong Kim1, Woo Suk Choi1, Bum Joon Kim2, Sung Hyuk Heo2, Dae-Il Chang2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The hyperintense acute reperfusion marker (HARM) is a delayed enhancement of the subarachnoid or subpial space observed on post-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images and is associated with permeability changes to the blood-brain barrier in acute stroke. We investigated the relationship between HARM and stroke etiology based on the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) classification. In addition, we evaluated the relationship between HARM and stroke locations with respect to vascular territories and anatomic compartments.Entities:
Keywords: Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment classification; acute stroke; hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; magnetic resonance imaging; post-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery
Year: 2017 PMID: 29276498 PMCID: PMC5727375 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00630
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Characteristics of TOAST stroke subtypes.
| Large artery atherosclerosis
Duplex scanning or angiography must show greater than 50% stenosis of an extracranial artery relevant to lesion Cortical, cerebellar, brainstem, or subcortical hemispheric infarctions greater than 1.5 cm diameter must be present Clinical finding of cerebral cortical impairment, brainstem, or cerebellar dysfunction must be present No apparent source or suspicious cardioembolism can be present |
| Small vessel occlusion
Patients must have a traditional lacunar syndrome of pure motor stroke, dysarthria or clumsy hand syndrome, or ataxic hemiparesis with no evidence of worsened cerebral cortical function A normal computed tomographic or magnetic resonance imaging scan or a relevant subcortical or brainstem lesion less than 1.5 cm in diameter must be present Patients must not have source of cardioembolism or stenosis of relevant extracranial artery of greater than 50% |
| Cardioembolism
Patient must have radiologic and clinical finding similar to those seen in large artery atherosclerosis: infarctions in multiple vascular distributions are even more suggestive No relevant extracranial artery may have stenosis or greater than 50% A high- or medium-risk cardioembolic source must be identified |
| Other determined causes
No source of cardioembolism or stenosis of a relevant extracranial artery greater than 50% can be present Other plausible sources must be identified Unknown causes Source cannot be determined, two causes are present, or evaluation is incomplete |
TOAST, Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment.
TOAST was the most commonly available examples of causative systems. However, with recent advances in diagnostic technology, multiple coexisting potential causes of ischemic stroke are frequently identified, which makes the selection of a causative subgroup a subjective process in clinical practice.
Demographics and stroke characteristics of patients according to the presence of HARM.
| Variable | Total ( | HARM (+) ( | HARM (−) ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regional ( | Randomized ( | |||||
| Sex ( | Male | 155 (58.71%) | 37 (66.07%) | 6 (50%) | 114 (57%) | 0.367 |
| Female | 109 (41.29%) | 19 (33.93%) | 6 (50%) | 86 (43%) | ||
| Age | Mean ± SD | 68.63 ± 11.14 | 68.88 ± 10.85 | 71.42 ± 14.82 | 68.44 ± 10.97 | 0.301 |
| Median | 70.50 | 71.00 | 74.00 | 70.00 | ||
| HTN ( | 186 | 40 | 8 | 140 | 0.971 | |
| DM ( | 95 | 21 | 4 | 71 | 0.872 | |
| Dyslipidemia ( | 176 | 39 | 7 | 130 | 0.727 | |
| Smoking ( | 121 | 29 | 3 | 90 | 0.793 | |
| Stroke Hx ( | 39 | 7 | 2 | 30 | 0.722 | |
| Large artery occlusion ( | 75 | 26 | 4 | 45 | 0.0006 | |
| Reperfusion therapy ( | 26 | 7 | 1 | 18 | 0.506 | |
| Time between symptom onset to MRI acquisition | Mean ± SD | 18 h and 07 min | 20 h and 33 min | 21 h and 24 min | 17 h and 14 min | 0.118 |
| Median | 12 h and 57 min | 13 h and 5 min | 15 h and 54 min | 12 h and 50 min | ||
| NIHSS at admission | Mean ± SD | 4.24 ± 3.98 | 4.15 ± 3.14 | 4.83 ± 3.87 | 4.23 ± 4.18 | 0.480 |
| Median | 4 | 4 | 4.5 | 4 | ||
| NIHSS at discharge | Mean ± SD | 3.30 ± 3.83 | 3.60 ± 4.10 | 4.75 ± 7.29 | 2.13 ± 3.40 | 0.006 |
| Median | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | ||
| NIHSS changes (discharge − admission) | Mean ± SD | −0.94 ± 3.80 | −0.55 ± 3.83 | −0.08 ± 8.76 | −1.10 ± 3.23 | 0.053 |
| Median | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| mRS at discharge | Mean ± SD | 2.05 ± 1.31 | 2.13 ± 1.32 | 2.25 ± 1.59 | 2.01 ± 1.30 | 0.418 |
| Median | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
HARM, hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; HTN, hypertension; DM, diabetes; Hx, history; NIHSS, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; mRS, Modified Rankin scale.
Table shows the univariate associations between the demographics, stroke characteristics and the presence of HARM. There was statistically significant difference in NIHSS at discharge between HARM-positive and -negative groups. Except NIHSS at discharge, other clinical variables were similar and there were no statistically significant differences between the HARM-positive and -negative groups.
Relative HARM incidence of patients according to stroke subtypes.
| TOAST | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total ( | 1. LAA ( | 2. SVO ( | 3. CE ( | 4. SOD ( | 5. SUD ( | Among subtypes | LAA vs. other subtypes | SVO vs. other subtypes | |||
| SUDm ( | SUDn ( | SUDi ( | |||||||||
| HARM (+) | 67 | 30 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 13 | 4 | <0.0001 | 0.001 | <0.0001 |
| HARM (−) | 197 | 45 | 82 | 22 | 2 | 12 | 27 | 7 | |||
| HARM (+) ( | 30 (40%) | 37 (19.57%) | 0.001 | ||||||||
| HARM (−) ( | 45 (60%) | 152 (82.42%) | |||||||||
| HARM (+) ( | 39 (36.79%) | 28 (17.72%) | <0.001 | ||||||||
| HARM (−) ( | 67 (63.21%) | 130 (82.28%) | |||||||||
| HARM (+) ( | 6 (6.81%) | 61 (34.65%) | <0.001 | ||||||||
| HARM (−) ( | 82 (93.18%) | 115 (65.34%) | |||||||||
HARM, hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; TOAST, Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment; LAA, large artery atherosclerosis; SVO, small vessel occlusion; CE, cardioembolism; SOD, strokes of other determined etiology; SUD, strokes of undetermined etiology; SUDm, two or more causes; SUDn, negative evaluation; SUDi, incomplete evaluation.
Among the 264 patients with acute ischemic stroke, 67 (25.38%) patients were HARM positive while, 197 (74.62%) patients were HARM negative (A). (B) The relatively higher incidence of HARM in the LAA group (40%) than in the other subgroups (19.57%) (.
Figure 1A 72-year-old male with a complaint of acute onset left arm weakness. Stroke due to large artery to artery atherosclerosis. (A) DWI shows acute border zone infarctions on the right cerebral hemisphere. (B) Three-dimensional time-of-flight MRA of extracranial arteries shows moderate-to-severe stenosis with plaque at right proximal internal carotid artery and ECA (arrows). Compared with non-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) (C), the post-contrast FLAIR (D) image shows diffuse sulcal enhancement (hyperintense acute reperfusion marker sign) along the right cerebral sulci (arrows).
Figure 2A 53-year-old female with a complaint of acute onset aphasia. Stroke due to cardioembolic. (A) DWI shows large diffusion restricted lesion on the left frontoparietotemporal lobes. (B) Post-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery image shows sulcal enhancement along the left frontoparietal sulci (arrows) compatible with hyperintense acute reperfusion marker. (C) Gradient-echo imaging image shows blooming artifact at the left proximal MCA (arrowhead) indicating intravascular thrombus. Note, hemorrhagic foci of stroke area at the left temporal lobe. (D) Three-dimensional time-of-flight MRA shows occlusion of proximal M1 segment of left MCA (arrowhead). There is no stenoocclusive lesion in the cervical arteries (not shown).
Multiple comparisons of the relative HARM incidence according to stroke subtypes.
| LAA vs. SVO | LAA vs. CE | LAA vs. SOD | LAA vs. SUD | SVO vs. CE | SVO vs. SOD | SVO vs. SUD | CE vs. SOD | CE vs. SUD | SOD vs. SUD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.011* | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.016** | 0.366 | 0.001*** | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
HARM, hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; LAA, large artery atherosclerosis; SVO, small vessel occlusion; CE, cardioembolism; SOD, strokes of other determined etiology; SUD, strokes of undetermined etiology.
Table shows the relative HARM incidence was significantly different between the LAA and SVO (.
Figure 3Multiple comparisons of the relative hyperintense acute reperfusion marker (HARM) incidence according to stroke subtypes.
Figure 4A 59-year-old male with a complaint of acute onset left side visual field defect in both eyes. Regional pattern of hyperintense acute reperfusion marker. (A) DWI shows acute infarction at the right occipital lobe involving the visual cortex. (B) Post-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery image shows sulcal enhancement along the right occipital lobe (arrows). Compared with outside CTA (C), three-dimensional time-of-flight MRA (D) shows the recanalization state of right distal posterior cerebral artery (dashed arrows).
Figure 5A 82-year-old female with a complaint of acute onset dizziness. Randomized pattern of hyperintense acute reperfusion marker. (A,B) Post-contrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery images show a diffuse, multifocal sulcal enhancement along both cerebral hemispheres (red arrows). (C) Three-dimensional time-of-flight MRA of cervical arteries does not show a stenoocclusive lesion. Furthermore, there was no stenoocclusive lesion in the intracranial arteries (not shown). (D) Contrast-enhanced T1WI shows multiple nodular or dot-like enhancing lesions (white arrows) on both cerebral hemispheres (not fully shown in this image) indicating acute to subacute stage infarctions.
Relative HARM incidence and HARM patterns of patients according to stroke subtypes.
| TOAST | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total ( | 1. LAA ( | 2. SVO ( | 3. CE ( | 4. SOD ( | 5. SUD ( | Among subtypes | LAA vs. other subtypes | SVO vs. other subtypes | |||
| SUDm ( | SUDn ( | SUDi ( | |||||||||
| HARM (+) | 67 | 30 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Regional | 55 | 26 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 12 | 3 | <0.0001 | 0.002 | <0.0001 |
| Randomized | 12 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| HARM (−) | 197 | 45 | 82 | 22 | 2 | 12 | 27 | 7 | |||
HARM, hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; LAA, large artery atherosclerosis; SVO, small vessel occlusion; CE, cardioembolism; SOD, strokes of other determined etiology; SUD, strokes of undetermined etiology; SUDm, two or more causes; SUDn, negative evaluation; SUDi, incomplete evaluation; TOAST, Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment.
Table shows the relative HARM incidences and HARM patterns between subgroups of stroke etiology. There was a statistically significant difference in HARM patterns among different subtypes (.
Relative HARM incidence of patients according to stroke location.
| Total | HARM (+) | HARM (−) | Logistic regression | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regional | Randomized | Odds ratio | CI | |||||
| ICA | 7 (2.61%) | 2 (3.57%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (2.5%) | 0.844 | 1.182 | 0.224 | 6.237 |
| MCA | 165 (61.57%) | 41 (73.21%) | 8 (66.67%) | 116 (58%) | 0.041 | 1.868 | 1.025 | 3.401 |
| ACA | 13 (4.85%) | 3 (5.36%) | 0 (0%) | 10 (5%) | 0.846 | 0.877 | 0.234 | 3.285 |
| PCA | 45 (16.79%) | 12 (21.43%) | 2 (16.67%) | 31 (15.5%) | 0.334 | 1.413 | 0.701 | 2.851 |
| BA | 37 (13.81%) | 1 (1.79%) | 0 (0%) | 36 (18%) | 0.009 | 0.068 | 0.009 | 0.506 |
| VA | 4 (1.49%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) | 0.985 | <0.001 | <0.001 | >999.999 |
| SCA | 5 (1.87%) | 1 (1.79%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) | 0.781 | 0.731 | 0.080 | 6.659 |
| AICA | 3 (1.12%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 3 (1.5%) | 0.987 | <0.001 | <0.001 | >999.999 |
| PICA | 17 (6.34%) | 3 (5.36%) | 2 (16.67%) | 12 (6%) | 0.693 | 1.243 | 0.422 | 3.667 |
| Border zone | 8 (2.99%) | 4 (7.14%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) | 0.121 | 3.063 | 0.744 | 12.598 |
| Multiple | 28 (10.45%) | 9 (16.07%) | 0 (0%) | 19 (9.5%) | 0.386 | 1.453 | 0.624 | 3.386 |
| Cortex | 122 (45.52%) | 50 (89.29%) | 6 (50%) | 66 (33%) | <0.0001 | 9.475 | 4.754 | 18.883 |
| CoronaR | 86 (32.09%) | 16 (28.57%) | 5 (41.67%) | 65 (32.5%) | 0.805 | 0.928 | 0.513 | 1.680 |
| BG + IC | 89 (33.21%) | 15 (26.79%) | 4 (33.33%) | 70 (35%) | 0.287 | 0.720 | 0.394 | 1.318 |
| Thalamus | 30 (11.19%) | 7 (12.5%) | 1 (8.33%) | 22 (11%) | 0.863 | 1.079 | 0.456 | 2.551 |
| Brainstem | 32 (11.94%) | 4 (7.14%) | 0 (0%) | 28 (14%) | 0.084 | 0.384 | 0.130 | 1.138 |
| Cerebellum | 19 (7.09%) | 3 (5.36%) | 2 (16.67%) | 14 (7%) | 0.921 | 1.055 | 0.365 | 3.046 |
HARM, hyperintense acute reperfusion marker; ICA, internal carotid artery; MCA, middle cerebral artery; ACA, anterior cerebral artery; PCA, posterior cerebral artery; BA, basilar artery; VA, vertebral artery; SCA, superior cerebellar artery; AICA, anterior inferior cerebellar artery; PICA, posterior inferior cerebellar artery; CI, confidence interval; coronaR, corona radiate; BG, basal ganglia; IC, internal capsule.
Table shows the relative HARM incidence between the HARM-positive and -negative groups according to stroke location by the involved vascular territory and anatomic compartment.