Matthew B Bevers1, Thomas W K Battey2,3, Ann-Christin Ostwaldt2,3, Reza Jahan4, Jeffrey L Saver5, W Taylor Kimberly2,3, Chelsea S Kidwell6. 1. Divisions of Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Critical Care Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Division of Neurocritical Care and Emergency Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan - UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. 5. Comprehensive Stroke Center and Department of Neurology, Ronald Reagan - UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) imaging is a biomarker of cytotoxic injury that predicts edema formation and outcome after ischemic stroke. It therefore has the potential to serve as a "tissue clock" to describe the extent of ischemic injury and potentially predict response to therapy. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between baseline ADC signal intensity, revascularization, and edema formation. METHODS: We examined the ADC signal intensity ratio (ADCr) of the stroke lesion (defined as the baseline DWI hyperintense region) compared to the contralateral normal hemisphere in 65 subjects from the Mechanical Retrieval and Recanalization of Stroke Clots Using Embolectomy trial. The associations between ADCr, neurologic outcome, and cerebral edema were examined. Finally, we explored the interaction between baseline ADCr and vessel recanalization at day 7 on post-stroke edema. RESULTS: We found that lower initial ADCr was associated with a worse outcome on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days (52.2% of those with ADCr <64% were mRS 5-6 vs. 19.1% with ADCr ≥64%, p = 0.006). Those subjects with reconstitution of flow distal to the initial vessel occlusion showed greater normalization of ADCr on follow-up scan (increase in ADCr of 16.4 ± 2.07 vs. 1.99 ± 4.33%, p = 0.0039). In those patients with low baseline ADCr, successful revascularization was associated with reduced edema (median swelling volume 164 mL [interquartile range (IQR) 53.3-190 mL] vs. 20.7 mL [IQR 3.20-55.1 mL], p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This study reaffirms the association of ADCr with outcome after stroke, supports the idea that reperfusion may attenuate rather than enhance post-stroke edema, and indicates that the degree of edema with and without revascularization may be predicted by ADCr.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) imaging is a biomarker of cytotoxic injury that predicts edema formation and outcome after ischemic stroke. It therefore has the potential to serve as a "tissue clock" to describe the extent of ischemic injury and potentially predict response to therapy. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between baseline ADC signal intensity, revascularization, and edema formation. METHODS: We examined the ADC signal intensity ratio (ADCr) of the stroke lesion (defined as the baseline DWI hyperintense region) compared to the contralateral normal hemisphere in 65 subjects from the Mechanical Retrieval and Recanalization of Stroke Clots Using Embolectomy trial. The associations between ADCr, neurologic outcome, and cerebral edema were examined. Finally, we explored the interaction between baseline ADCr and vessel recanalization at day 7 on post-stroke edema. RESULTS: We found that lower initial ADCr was associated with a worse outcome on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days (52.2% of those with ADCr <64% were mRS 5-6 vs. 19.1% with ADCr ≥64%, p = 0.006). Those subjects with reconstitution of flow distal to the initial vessel occlusion showed greater normalization of ADCr on follow-up scan (increase in ADCr of 16.4 ± 2.07 vs. 1.99 ± 4.33%, p = 0.0039). In those patients with low baseline ADCr, successful revascularization was associated with reduced edema (median swelling volume 164 mL [interquartile range (IQR) 53.3-190 mL] vs. 20.7 mL [IQR 3.20-55.1 mL], p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This study reaffirms the association of ADCr with outcome after stroke, supports the idea that reperfusion may attenuate rather than enhance post-stroke edema, and indicates that the degree of edema with and without revascularization may be predicted by ADCr.
Authors: Hannah J Irvine; Ann-Christin Ostwaldt; Matthew B Bevers; Simone Dixon; Thomas Wk Battey; Bruce Cv Campbell; Stephen M Davis; Geoffrey A Donnan; Kevin N Sheth; Reza Jahan; Jeffrey L Saver; Chelsea S Kidwell; W Taylor Kimberly Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Hayley M Wheeler; Michael Mlynash; Manabu Inoue; Aaryani Tipirnini; John Liggins; Roland Bammer; Maarten G Lansberg; Stephanie Kemp; Greg Zaharchuk; Matus Straka; Gregory W Albers Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Chelsea S Kidwell; Max Wintermark; Deidre A De Silva; Timothy J Schaewe; Reza Jahan; Sidney Starkman; Tudor Jovin; Jason Hom; Mouhammad Jumaa; Jeffrie Schreier; Jeffrey Gornbein; David S Liebeskind; Jeffry R Alger; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-12-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Pooja Khatri; Joddi Neff; Joseph P Broderick; Jane C Khoury; Janice Carrozzella; Thomas Tomsick Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-10-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Bijoy K Menon; Muneer Eesa; Jeremy L Rempel; John Thornton; Daniel Roy; Tudor G Jovin; Robert A Willinsky; Biggya L Sapkota; Dar Dowlatshahi; Donald F Frei; Noreen R Kamal; Walter J Montanera; Alexandre Y Poppe; Karla J Ryckborst; Frank L Silver; Ashfaq Shuaib; Donatella Tampieri; David Williams; Oh Young Bang; Blaise W Baxter; Paul A Burns; Hana Choe; Ji-Hoe Heo; Christine A Holmstedt; Brian Jankowitz; Michael Kelly; Guillermo Linares; Jennifer L Mandzia; Jai Shankar; Sung-Il Sohn; Richard H Swartz; Philip A Barber; Shelagh B Coutts; Eric E Smith; William F Morrish; Alain Weill; Suresh Subramaniam; Alim P Mitha; John H Wong; Mark W Lowerison; Tolulope T Sajobi; Michael D Hill Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Werner Hacke; Markku Kaste; Erich Bluhmki; Miroslav Brozman; Antoni Dávalos; Donata Guidetti; Vincent Larrue; Kennedy R Lees; Zakaria Medeghri; Thomas Machnig; Dietmar Schneider; Rüdiger von Kummer; Nils Wahlgren; Danilo Toni Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Deepu R Pillai; Michael S Dittmar; Dobri Baldaranov; Robin M Heidemann; Erica C Henning; Gerhard Schuierer; Ulrich Bogdahn; Felix Schlachetzki Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2009-08-05 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Joseph V Guadagno; Elizabeth A Warburton; Franklin I Aigbirhio; Piotr Smielewski; Tim D Fryer; Sally Harding; Christopher J Price; Jonathan H Gillard; T Adrian Carpenter; Jean-Claude Baron Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Ann-Christin Ostwaldt; Thomas W K Battey; Hannah J Irvine; Bruce C V Campbell; Stephen M Davis; Geoffrey A Donnan; W Taylor Kimberly Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2018-05-24 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Maria Eleni Karakatsani; Antonios N Pouliopoulos; Michael Liu; Sachin R Jambawalikar; Elisa E Konofagou Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 4.756
Authors: Mercy H Mazurek; Bradley A Cahn; Matthew M Yuen; Anjali M Prabhat; Isha R Chavva; Jill T Shah; Anna L Crawford; E Brian Welch; Jonathan Rothberg; Laura Sacolick; Michael Poole; Charles Wira; Charles C Matouk; Adrienne Ward; Nona Timario; Audrey Leasure; Rachel Beekman; Teng J Peng; Jens Witsch; Joseph P Antonios; Guido J Falcone; Kevin T Gobeske; Nils Petersen; Joseph Schindler; Lauren Sansing; Emily J Gilmore; David Y Hwang; Jennifer A Kim; Ajay Malhotra; Gordon Sze; Matthew S Rosen; W Taylor Kimberly; Kevin N Sheth Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 14.919