INTRODUCTION: Rapid imaging in acute stroke is critical and often occurs before full examination. Early, reliable examination findings clarify diagnosis and improve treatment times. The DeyeCOM sign has been described as a predictor of ischemic stroke. In this study, we evaluate a sustained DeyeCOM sign on serial computed tomography scans in prediction of large vessel occlusion. METHODS: Between April and June 2017, we retrospectively reviewed 46 patients with acute stroke from the University of California, San Diego Stroke Registry, who had both computed tomography and computed tomography angiography as part of their acute work-up. A DeyeCOM(+) sign was defined as a conjugate gaze deviation on imaging of at least 15°. DeyeCOM(++) was defined as sustained gaze deviation on both scans. RESULTS: Three groups of patients were observed: DeyeCOM(++), nonsustained gaze deviation, and no gaze deviation (DeyeCOM(--)). All patients in the DeyeCOM(++) (8 of 8, 100%) had large vessel occlusion. Of those with nonsustained gaze deviation, 2 of 7 (29%) had large vessel occlusion. No patients in the DeyeCOM(--) (0 of 31, 100%) had large vessel occlusion. The specificity and sensitivity of DeyeCOM(++) for large vessel occlusion was 100% (confidence interval [CI] .90-1.0) and 80% (CI .44-.97). The specificity and sensitivity of DeyeCOM(--) for absence of large vessel occlusion was 100% (CI .69-1.0) and 86% (CI .70-.95). CONCLUSIONS: DeyeCOM(++) had 100% specificity for large vessel occlusion, whereas DeyeCOM(--) had a 100% specificity for absence of large vessel occlusion. Sustained DeyeCOM, whether positive or negative, is a strong predictor of ultimate diagnosis that could lead to quicker endovascular treatment times.
INTRODUCTION: Rapid imaging in acute stroke is critical and often occurs before full examination. Early, reliable examination findings clarify diagnosis and improve treatment times. The DeyeCOM sign has been described as a predictor of ischemic stroke. In this study, we evaluate a sustained DeyeCOM sign on serial computed tomography scans in prediction of large vessel occlusion. METHODS: Between April and June 2017, we retrospectively reviewed 46 patients with acute stroke from the University of California, San Diego Stroke Registry, who had both computed tomography and computed tomography angiography as part of their acute work-up. A DeyeCOM(+) sign was defined as a conjugate gaze deviation on imaging of at least 15°. DeyeCOM(++) was defined as sustained gaze deviation on both scans. RESULTS: Three groups of patients were observed: DeyeCOM(++), nonsustained gaze deviation, and no gaze deviation (DeyeCOM(--)). All patients in the DeyeCOM(++) (8 of 8, 100%) had large vessel occlusion. Of those with nonsustained gaze deviation, 2 of 7 (29%) had large vessel occlusion. No patients in the DeyeCOM(--) (0 of 31, 100%) had large vessel occlusion. The specificity and sensitivity of DeyeCOM(++) for large vessel occlusion was 100% (confidence interval [CI] .90-1.0) and 80% (CI .44-.97). The specificity and sensitivity of DeyeCOM(--) for absence of large vessel occlusion was 100% (CI .69-1.0) and 86% (CI .70-.95). CONCLUSIONS: DeyeCOM(++) had 100% specificity for large vessel occlusion, whereas DeyeCOM(--) had a 100% specificity for absence of large vessel occlusion. Sustained DeyeCOM, whether positive or negative, is a strong predictor of ultimate diagnosis that could lead to quicker endovascular treatment times.
Authors: Clarity R Coffman; Rema Raman; Karin Ernstrom; Nabeel A Herial; Konrad H Schlick; Karen Rapp; Royya F Modir; Dawn M Meyer; Thomas M Hemmen; Brett C Meyer Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: David Carrera; Bruce C V Campbell; Jordi Cortés; Montse Gorchs; Marisol Querol; Xavier Jiménez; Mònica Millán; Antoni Dávalos; Natalia Pérez de la Ossa Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Olvert A Berkhemer; Puck S S Fransen; Debbie Beumer; Lucie A van den Berg; Hester F Lingsma; Albert J Yoo; Wouter J Schonewille; Jan Albert Vos; Paul J Nederkoorn; Marieke J H Wermer; Marianne A A van Walderveen; Julie Staals; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Jacques A van Oostayen; Geert J Lycklama à Nijeholt; Jelis Boiten; Patrick A Brouwer; Bart J Emmer; Sebastiaan F de Bruijn; Lukas C van Dijk; L Jaap Kappelle; Rob H Lo; Ewoud J van Dijk; Joost de Vries; Paul L M de Kort; Willem Jan J van Rooij; Jan S P van den Berg; Boudewijn A A M van Hasselt; Leo A M Aerden; René J Dallinga; Marieke C Visser; Joseph C J Bot; Patrick C Vroomen; Omid Eshghi; Tobien H C M L Schreuder; Roel J J Heijboer; Koos Keizer; Alexander V Tielbeek; Heleen M den Hertog; Dick G Gerrits; Renske M van den Berg-Vos; Giorgos B Karas; Ewout W Steyerberg; H Zwenneke Flach; Henk A Marquering; Marieke E S Sprengers; Sjoerd F M Jenniskens; Ludo F M Beenen; René van den Berg; Peter J Koudstaal; Wim H van Zwam; Yvo B W E M Roos; Aad van der Lugt; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Charles B L M Majoie; Diederik W J Dippel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kara M Schwartz; Ahmed T Ahmed; Jennifer E Fugate; Felix E Diehn; Laurence J Eckel; Christopher H Hunt; David F Kallmes Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Ansaar T Rai; Matthew S Smith; SoHyun Boo; Abdul R Tarabishy; Gerald R Hobbs; Jeffrey S Carpenter Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Ilana Spokoyny; James Y Chen; Rema Raman; Karin Ernstrom; Kunal Agrawal; Royya F Modir; Dawn M Meyer; Brett C Meyer Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2016-08-26 Impact factor: 2.677